The interpretation and application of Article 13(1) b) of the Hague Child Abduction Convention in cases involving domestic violence: Revisiting X v Latvia and the principle of “effective examination”

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A key interpretation and application issue in the scheme of Article 13(1) b) of the Hague Child Abduction Convention is whether judges should investigate first the merits of the defence before considering whether protective measures are adequate or whether they should first consider the adequacy of protective measures. There is no generally accepted international practice nor is there clear authority on the appropriate or preferred approach. This article argues that judges should always undertake an effective examination of the allegations of domestic violence first before considering whether, if there is merit to the allegations and they are substantiated, adequate protective measures can sufficiently ameliorate the grave risk of harm.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)626-657
JournalJournal of Private International Law
Volume15
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Keywords

  • 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction
  • DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
  • Child abduction
  • article 13 (1) b)
  • grave risk of harm
  • child protection

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The interpretation and application of Article 13(1) b) of the Hague Child Abduction Convention in cases involving domestic violence: Revisiting X v Latvia and the principle of “effective examination”'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this