Soucie v Soucie: 1995

After noting the approval of In re N in Perrin the court added: ‘Furthermore the question of settlement had to be considered in the context of the spirit of the Convention whereby the fundamental duty of the court is to order a return of the child to the proper jurisdiction when there has been a wrongful removal or retention.’ The court considered whether any discretion remained to make an order after the one year period under Art 18: ‘Such a balancing exercise may be appropriate when considering the discretionary powers of the court under Article 18, which will come into play if the proviso to Article 12 is established or indeed if any of the matters contained in Article 13, which will come into play if the proviso to Article 12 is established or indeed if any of the matters contained in Article 13 are established.’ and ‘We should add that we were addressed on the matter of discretion which would have arisen under Article 18 if we had been satisfied that either of the main issues should be decided in favour of the respondent.’

Citations:

(1995) SLT 414

Statutes:

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRe N (Minors) (Abduction) FD 2-Jan-1991
The court considered the degree of settlement that had to be proved under the Act: ‘The second question which has arisen is: what is the degree of settlement which has to be demonstrated? There is some force, I find, in the argument that legal . .
CitedPerrin v Perrin IHCS 1994
. .

Cited by:

CitedCannon v Cannon CA 19-Oct-2004
The mother had brought the child to the UK wrongfully. She had hidden their identity for more than a year. Upon discovering her, the father came to England and began proceedings for the child’s return to the US.
Held: Because the child’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Children

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.219158