Lancashire County Council -v- V.S. & anor [2017] IEHC 678 (27 October 2017)
The child was habitually resident in England at the time of removal. The applicant local authority had and was exercising custody rights under the Care Order. The respondents' objection did not meet the threshold for the grave risk defence under Article 13 of the Hague Convention. The return of the child is ordered.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] IEHC 678
- Parties
- Applicant: Lancashire County Council; Respondent: V. S.; Respondent: A. A.
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 05 December 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Child Abduction Return Application / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- application granted
- Legal Topics
- Child Abduction, Custody Rights, Hague Convention, Council Regulation (ec) 2201/2003
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Lancashire County Council
Applicant
V. S.
Respondent
A. A.
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction Return Application / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the removal of S. from England was wrongful under the Hague Convention
- 2 Whether the applicant was exercising custody rights at the time of removal
- 3 Whether any defence under Article 13 of the Hague Convention applies
Ratio Decidendi
The child was habitually resident in England at the time of removal. The applicant local authority had and was exercising custody rights under the Care Order. The respondents' objection did not meet the threshold for the grave risk defence under Article 13 of the Hague Convention. The return of the child is ordered.
Court Disposition
application granted
Orders
- Return of S. to England and Wales directed
- Matter to be listed for directions within seven days of return
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment