K v E (No. 2) (Child Abduction: Consent, Views of the Child) (Approved) [2024] IEHC 43 (01 February 2024)

K v E (No. 2) (Child Abduction: Consent, Views of the Child) (Approved) [2024] IEHC 43 (01 February 2024)

The children were wrongfully retained in Ireland as there was no unequivocal consent or acquiescence by the Applicant to a permanent move, and the habitual residence remained Sweden. The Respondent failed to establish grave risk that could not be managed in Sweden. While the children's objections were strong and their welfare a concern, these did not outweigh the objectives of the Hague Convention. However, due to the specific family circumstances and the failed agreement to relocate, the return order is stayed to allow arrangements for the children's security.

Citation
[2024] IEHC 43
Parties
Applicant: K.; Respondent: E.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
01 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction Under Hague Convention / Judgment on Second Application for Return Order
Outcome
Mandatory return order made under the Hague Convention, but order stayed to allow arrangements for accommodation and security for the children.
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Hague Convention, Custody Rights, Consent and Acquiescence, Habitual Residence, Grave Risk Exception, Views of the Child
Family Law International Law Child Abduction Hague Convention Custody Rights Consent and Acquiescence Habitual Residence Grave Risk Exception +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K.

Applicant

E.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction Under Hague Convention / Judgment on Second Application for Return Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children were wrongfully retained in Ireland under the Hague Convention
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant consented to or acquiesced in the children's retention
  3. 3 Whether the habitual residence of the children changed to Ireland

Ratio Decidendi

The children were wrongfully retained in Ireland as there was no unequivocal consent or acquiescence by the Applicant to a permanent move, and the habitual residence remained Sweden. The Respondent failed to establish grave risk that could not be managed in Sweden. While the children's objections were strong and their welfare a concern, these did not outweigh the objectives of the Hague Convention. However, due to the specific family circumstances and the failed agreement to relocate, the return order is stayed to allow arrangements for the children's security.

Court Disposition

Mandatory return order made under the Hague Convention, but order stayed to allow arrangements for accommodation and security for the children.

Orders

  • Return of the children to Sweden ordered under the Hague Convention.
  • Stay on the return order to allow parties to arrange accommodation in Town A for the children's security.