Conflicts of EU courts on child abduction: the reality of Article 11(6)-(8) Brussels IIa proceedings across the EU

Paul Beaumont, Lara Walker, Jayne Holliday

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)
11 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article contains the final findings from a research project funded by the Nuffield Foundation and conducted by the authors on “Conflicts of EU Courts on Child Abduction”. Such “conflicts” were deliberately created by the EU legislature when it created a power in Article 11(6)-(8) of the Brussels IIa Regulation for the courts of the habitual residence to insist on the return of a child that has been abducted after a court in the State where the child was abducted to has refused to return the child on the basis of one of the exceptions to the duty to return provided for in Article 13 of the Hague Child Abduction Convention 1980. It will reveal how infrequently used and largely ineffective the Article 11(6)-(8) system is and will make proposals for law reform in the current revision of the Brussels IIa Regulation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)211-260
Number of pages49
JournalJournal of Private International Law
Volume12
Issue number2
Early online date5 Aug 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

abduction
EU
regulation
law reform
research project

Keywords

  • international family law
  • child abduction
  • intra-EU cases
  • Brussels IIa Regulation
  • Hague Child Abduction Convention
  • gender of abducting parent
  • right of a child to be heard
  • right of parents to be heard
  • grave risk of harm
  • child's objections to return
  • consent
  • acquiescence

Cite this

Conflicts of EU courts on child abduction : the reality of Article 11(6)-(8) Brussels IIa proceedings across the EU. / Beaumont, Paul; Walker, Lara; Holliday, Jayne.

In: Journal of Private International Law, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2016, p. 211-260.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2a8ef553756e42dfb38887c4af239575,
title = "Conflicts of EU courts on child abduction: the reality of Article 11(6)-(8) Brussels IIa proceedings across the EU",
abstract = "This article contains the final findings from a research project funded by the Nuffield Foundation and conducted by the authors on “Conflicts of EU Courts on Child Abduction”. Such “conflicts” were deliberately created by the EU legislature when it created a power in Article 11(6)-(8) of the Brussels IIa Regulation for the courts of the habitual residence to insist on the return of a child that has been abducted after a court in the State where the child was abducted to has refused to return the child on the basis of one of the exceptions to the duty to return provided for in Article 13 of the Hague Child Abduction Convention 1980. It will reveal how infrequently used and largely ineffective the Article 11(6)-(8) system is and will make proposals for law reform in the current revision of the Brussels IIa Regulation.",
keywords = "international family law, child abduction, intra-EU cases, Brussels IIa Regulation, Hague Child Abduction Convention, gender of abducting parent, right of a child to be heard, right of parents to be heard, grave risk of harm, child's objections to return, consent, acquiescence",
author = "Paul Beaumont and Lara Walker and Jayne Holliday",
note = "This article is the result of our research project “Conflicts of EU Courts on Child Abduction” that was kindly funded by the Nuffield Foundation.",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1080/17441048.2016.1206708",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "211--260",
journal = "Journal of Private International Law",
issn = "1744-1048",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conflicts of EU courts on child abduction

T2 - the reality of Article 11(6)-(8) Brussels IIa proceedings across the EU

AU - Beaumont, Paul

AU - Walker, Lara

AU - Holliday, Jayne

N1 - This article is the result of our research project “Conflicts of EU Courts on Child Abduction” that was kindly funded by the Nuffield Foundation.

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - This article contains the final findings from a research project funded by the Nuffield Foundation and conducted by the authors on “Conflicts of EU Courts on Child Abduction”. Such “conflicts” were deliberately created by the EU legislature when it created a power in Article 11(6)-(8) of the Brussels IIa Regulation for the courts of the habitual residence to insist on the return of a child that has been abducted after a court in the State where the child was abducted to has refused to return the child on the basis of one of the exceptions to the duty to return provided for in Article 13 of the Hague Child Abduction Convention 1980. It will reveal how infrequently used and largely ineffective the Article 11(6)-(8) system is and will make proposals for law reform in the current revision of the Brussels IIa Regulation.

AB - This article contains the final findings from a research project funded by the Nuffield Foundation and conducted by the authors on “Conflicts of EU Courts on Child Abduction”. Such “conflicts” were deliberately created by the EU legislature when it created a power in Article 11(6)-(8) of the Brussels IIa Regulation for the courts of the habitual residence to insist on the return of a child that has been abducted after a court in the State where the child was abducted to has refused to return the child on the basis of one of the exceptions to the duty to return provided for in Article 13 of the Hague Child Abduction Convention 1980. It will reveal how infrequently used and largely ineffective the Article 11(6)-(8) system is and will make proposals for law reform in the current revision of the Brussels IIa Regulation.

KW - international family law

KW - child abduction

KW - intra-EU cases

KW - Brussels IIa Regulation

KW - Hague Child Abduction Convention

KW - gender of abducting parent

KW - right of a child to be heard

KW - right of parents to be heard

KW - grave risk of harm

KW - child's objections to return

KW - consent

KW - acquiescence

U2 - 10.1080/17441048.2016.1206708

DO - 10.1080/17441048.2016.1206708

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 211

EP - 260

JO - Journal of Private International Law

JF - Journal of Private International Law

SN - 1744-1048

IS - 2

ER -