ERG, Re Orders Under the Child Abduction & Custody Act 1985 [2011] ScotCS CSOH_126 (04 August 2011)

ERG, Re Orders Under the Child Abduction & Custody Act 1985 [2011] ScotCS CSOH_126 (04 August 2011)

The interim order of the Latvian court authorising the child's residence in Scotland supersedes the Hague Convention return request, making the retention of the child in Scotland not wrongful under the Hague Convention and Brussels II bis. Therefore, the return order must be refused.

Citation
[2011] ScotCS CSOH_126
Parties
Petitioner: ERG; Respondent: EAG
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Petition for Return Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 / Final Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Petition refused
Legal Topics
International Child Abduction, Hague Convention, Custody and Residence Orders, Jurisdiction Under Brussels II Bis, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ERG

Petitioner

EAG

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Return Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 / Final Judgment at First Instance

  1. 1 Whether an interim residence order by the home state court supersedes a Hague Convention request for return of a child
  2. 2 Whether the retention of the child in Scotland is wrongful under the Hague Convention and Brussels II bis
  3. 3 Whether a return order would violate Article 8 ECHR rights or the best interests of the child

Ratio Decidendi

The interim order of the Latvian court authorising the child's residence in Scotland supersedes the Hague Convention return request, making the retention of the child in Scotland not wrongful under the Hague Convention and Brussels II bis. Therefore, the return order must be refused.

Court Disposition

Petition refused

Orders

  • First Plea-in-Law for the Respondent sustained
  • Prayer of the Petition refused