Provisional Measures and Child Abduction Proceedings

Župan, Mirela; Ledić, Senija; Drventić, Martina

doi:10.25234/pv/5995

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…31 This informative table contains the information on EU judicial cooperation for 25 Member States that provided their answer. 32 16 Member States replied that all or most of the caseworkers of the Central Authority work from home, i.e. telework.…”

Section: The Operation Of Eu Central Authoritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Covid-19 Challenges to the Child Abduction Proceedings

Drventić

2021

EU 2021 – The Future of the EU in and After the Pandemic

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While creating a new notion of everyday life, the COVID-19 pandemic also affects the resolution of cross-border family disputes, including the international child abduction cases. The return of an abducted child to the country of his or her habitual residence is challenged by travel restrictions, international border closures, quarantine measures, but also by closed courts or cancelled hearings. Those new circumstances that befell the whole world underline two issues considering child abduction proceedings. The first one considers access to justice in terms of a mere possibility of the applicant to initiate the return proceeding and, where the procedure is initiated, in terms of the manner of conducting the procedure. The legislation requires a quick initiation and a summary resolution of child abduction proceedings, which is crucial to ensuring the best interests and well-being of a child. This includes the obligation of the court to hear both the child and the applicant. Secondly, it is to be expected that COVID-19 will be used as a reason for child abduction and increasingly as justification for issuing non-return orders seen as a “grave risk” to the child under Article 13(1)(b) of the Child Abduction Convention. By analysing court practice from the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020 to March 2021, the research will investigate how the pandemic has affected child abduction proceedings in Croatia. Available national practice of other contracting states will also be examined. The aim of the research is to evaluate whether there were obstacles in accessing the national competent authorities and courts during the COVID-19 pandemic, and in which manner the courts conducted the proceedings and interpreted the existence of the pandemic in the context of the grave risk of harm exception. The analyses of Croatian and other national practices will be used to gain an overall insight into the effectiveness of the emerging guidance and suggest their possible broadening in COVID-19 circumstances or any other future crises.

show abstract

Section: The Operation Of Eu Central Authoritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Covid-19 Challenges to the Child Abduction Proceedings

Drventić

2021

EU 2021 – The Future of the EU in and After the Pandemic

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While exercising his right to contact with the child, while the return proceeding was pending before a Croatian court, the applicant father (re)abducted the child, leading him to withdraw his request. 33…”

Section: A Number and Nature Of The Requestsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-Border Removal and Retention of a Child – Croatian Practice and European Expectation

Župan

Drventić

Kruger

2020

International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract This research relates to the collection, processing, and analysis of incoming child abduction proceedings of the four biggest municipal courts (of Zagreb, Osijek, Split, and Rijeka) in Croatia. The research focused on proceedings initiated between 1 July 2013 and 1 July 2017. The collected decisions (all unpublished) were critically evaluated with the help of a number of variables. The results are comparable to other national and international studies. The most interesting studies relate to the duration of certain procedures, voluntary return of the child and achievement of an amicable agreement, the hearing of children, the different causes of abduction, the decisions in return proceedings, and the relevance of the social welfare report to a return decision. This research allows us to evaluate the Croatian practices against the requirements of European and international legal frameworks. The results have already led to law reform in Croatia.

show abstract

Application of Brussels II bis regulation in exercising the right of access to a child by extended family members

Dragišić¹

2021

Zb Pravnog fak Niš

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, the author explores the sources of European Union Law that regulate one segment of parental responsibility - the right of access to a child. The focal point of research is the transition from the conventional (interstate) regulation of judicial cooperation in marital disputes and parental responsibility issues to the regulation enacted by the European Union institutions, with specific reference to the Brussels II bis Regulation. First, the author briefly points out to its relationship with other relevant international law sources regulating this subject matter: the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction; the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Cooperation in the Field of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children; and other international sources of law. Then, the author examines in more detail its relationship with the Brussels II bis recast Regulation, which will be applicable as of 1 August 2022. In addition, the paper includes an analysis of the first case in which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided on the application of the Brussels II bis Regulation, at the request of granparents to exercise the right of access to the child. On the issue of determining the competent court which has jurisdiction to decide on how this right shall be exercised, the CJEU had to decide whether the competent court is determined on the basis of the Brussels II bis Regulation or on the basis of national Private International Law rules. This paper is useful for the professional and scientific community because it deals (inter alia) with the issue of justification of adopting a special source of law at the EU level, which would regulate the issue of mutual enforcement of court decisions on the right of access to the child. This legal solution was proposed by the Republic of France, primarily guided by the fundamental right of the child to have contact with both parents.

show abstract

Provisional Measures and Child Abduction Proceedings

Abstract: Brussels II bis Regulation, op. cit. note 8, Article 60(1)(e). 14 Convention on Measures for the Protection of Children, op. cit. note 7), Article 52(1).

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Covid-19 Challenges to the Child Abduction Proceedings

Covid-19 Challenges to the Child Abduction Proceedings

Cross-Border Removal and Retention of a Child – Croatian Practice and European Expectation

Application of Brussels II bis regulation in exercising the right of access to a child by extended family members

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About