W v W (Child Abduction: Consent and Acquiescence, Evidence on Affidavit, Views of the Child) (Approved) [2023] IEHC 150 (22 March 2023)

W v W (Child Abduction: Consent and Acquiescence, Evidence on Affidavit, Views of the Child) (Approved) [2023] IEHC 150 (22 March 2023)

The Court found that the family moved to Ireland with the intention of settling, that the Applicant consented to the move, and that the child's habitual residence changed to Ireland by August 2021. The Applicant's subsequent withdrawal of consent was ineffective. The Applicant also acquiesced by failing to take timely action. The child's views, expressing fear and sadness at the prospect of return, further supported refusal of the return order. The Applicant failed to establish wrongful retention under the Hague Convention.

Citation
[2023] IEHC 150
Parties
Applicant: W.; Respondent: W.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
22 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Child Abduction Under Hague Convention / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application for return of the child refused.
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Hague Convention, Habitual Residence, Consent, Acquiescence, Views of the Child
Family Law International Law Child Abduction Hague Convention Habitual Residence Consent Acquiescence Views of the Child

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W.

Applicant

W.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Abduction Under Hague Convention / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Applicant consented to the child's move to Ireland
  2. 2 Whether the child was habitually resident in Slovakia or Ireland at the relevant time
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant acquiesced to the child's retention in Ireland

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the family moved to Ireland with the intention of settling, that the Applicant consented to the move, and that the child's habitual residence changed to Ireland by August 2021. The Applicant's subsequent withdrawal of consent was ineffective. The Applicant also acquiesced by failing to take timely action. The child's views, expressing fear and sadness at the prospect of return, further supported refusal of the return order. The Applicant failed to establish wrongful retention under the Hague Convention.

Court Disposition

Application for return of the child refused.

Orders

  • No order for return of the child to Slovakia.