A New York Lawyer Specialized on The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

“International child abduction cases—particularly those governed by the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction—are legally and logistically complex. These cases often involve parallel proceedings in two countries, requiring coordination between multiple legal teams, interpreters, and navigating differing legal systems, which can be costly and time-consuming. In the United States, for example, a California family court cannot assert jurisdiction unless one of the parties is a legal resident of the state. Furthermore, when a child has been taken to or retained in a foreign country, U.S. courts generally defer to the courts of the child’s country of habitual residence to determine custody. The primary goal of the Hague Convention is not to decide custody but to return the child promptly to their habitual residence so that custody can be addressed by the appropriate jurisdiction.”

Elena Giannattasio | Founder, Multi-Jurisdictional Divorce

Understanding the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is a treaty designed to combat international child abduction by a parent or guardian. Its core purpose is to ensure that children who are unlawfully taken across international borders are quickly returned to the country where they habitually reside, so custody matters can be settled in the appropriate jurisdiction.

When the Hague Convention Applies

To invoke the Convention’s protections, several key conditions must be met:

  1. Both Countries Must Be Signatories
    The nation where the child usually lives and the country to which the child has been taken or retained must both be parties to the Convention.
  2. Age Limitation
    The child must be under 16 years old at the time of the wrongful removal or retention.
  3. Violation of Custody Rights
    The removal or retention must breach existing custody rights as recognized under the law of the child’s country of habitual residence.

Purpose of the Convention

This treaty is not intended to determine custody or visitation rights. Instead, it focuses on returning the child to their home country so that legal custody issues can be addressed by the appropriate authorities there.

WHY OUR
CLIENTS
CHOOSE US?

We’re “not
your average
law firm.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Click edit button to change this text. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

Routes for Seeking Relief

There are two main avenues available under the Convention for individuals seeking the return of a child:

  • Administrative Route
    The left-behind parent can request help from the Central Authority in either the child’s home country or the country where the child is located. In the United States, this authority is the Office of Children’s Issues within the State Department.
  • Judicial Route
    Alternatively, a legal action can be brought in court in the country where the child is currently found. In the U.S., both federal and state courts have the authority to hear Hague Convention cases.

While foreign court decisions under the Convention are not automatically binding in the U.S., they are generally respected under principles of international comity.

Understanding Wrongful Removal

Under Article 3 of the Convention, a removal or retention is considered “wrongful” when:

  • It violates custody rights under the law of the child’s country of habitual residence; and
  • The parent was actively exercising those rights, or would have done so but for the removal or retention.

Defining Habitual Residence

The Convention does not clearly define “habitual residence,” leading to significant legal debate. However, U.S. and international courts have outlined key principles:

  • It’s determined by where the child had a stable presence and lived for a meaningful amount of time.
  • It’s not based on citizenship or future intent but on past living arrangements.
  • A person can have only one habitual residence at a time.

In Feder v. Evans-Feder, for instance, the court emphasized the child’s perspective and level of acclimatization in the location.

Legal Custody and Rights of Residence

Legal custody rights are defined by the law of the child’s habitual residence. Some countries, such as the UK, France, and Australia, interpret the right to determine a child’s place of residence as a custody right—even if a parent lacks full physical custody. Conversely, some U.S. courts have taken a more restrictive approach, notably in Croll v. Croll, limiting custody to those with formal custodial authority.

Exceptions to Return (Defenses)

Even when wrongful removal is established, the Convention allows for limited exceptions that may prevent a child’s return. The parent opposing return bears the burden of proof. The primary defenses include:

  1. Grave Risk of Harm
    The return would place the child in serious danger (e.g., abuse, war zones, or severe neglect), and the home country’s legal system cannot adequately protect the child.
  2. Fundamental Human Rights
    Return would violate the basic rights and freedoms protected in the receiving country—used only in extraordinary cases.
  3. Child Now Settled
    If more than one year has passed since the wrongful removal and the child is now well-established in the new country, the court may deny return.
  4. Lack of Custody Exercise
    The petitioning parent was not actively exercising custody rights at the time of removal or retention.
  5. Consent or Acquiescence
    The petitioner either agreed to the move or later accepted it.
  6. Child’s Objection
    If the child is old enough and mature enough, and expresses a clear objection to returning, the court may consider their wishes.

Conditions for Return Orders

Courts may issue return orders with certain conditions or undertakings to safeguard the child and the parent returning with the child, such as:

  • Payment of travel and relocation expenses.
  • Securing housing or financial support in the country of habitual residence.
  • No-contact or limited-contact orders for the petitioning parent.

Limits on Petitioner's Rights

A parent who fled to another country to evade criminal prosecution in the United States may be barred from bringing a case under the Hague Convention in U.S. courts.

Conclusion

The Hague Convention serves as a vital international framework for addressing cross-border child abductions. While it does not resolve custody disputes, it ensures such decisions are made in the proper jurisdiction. Its procedures are detailed and its exceptions narrow, reflecting the international commitment to protecting children from wrongful international removals.

Want to feel secure about your future?

Country By Country Information About Child Abduction and Divorce.

International Child Abduction: Israel

The Hague Convention was adopted by Israeli Knesset in 1991, to facilitates the return of minors wrongfully removed from their country of residence, allowing the courts of the country of origin to address custody matters. The Convention’s purpose is to

International Child Abduction and International Child Custody Law: The United Arab Emirates

International Child Abduction and USA Expatriates Custody Disputes in the United Arab Emirates The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The UAE does not have a

International Child Abduction and International Child Custody Law: The Philippines

International Parental Child Abduction between the Philippines and the United States Despite the Philippines accession to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, the United States has yet to accept it, which means that the Hague

Ready to explore your legal options?

Let’s discuss about a much better tomorrow.

Schedule a consultation with me.