About our international law blog

  • This site tracks developments in international family law from Richard Crouch and John Crouch of Crouch & Crouch in Arlington, Virginia. Our international practice has grown naturally from our location in our native Arlington, where our clients include many military, diplomatic and immigrant families, international organization employees, IT professionals, etc. This blog's purpose is to comment on the ongoing development of the law, and help other lawyers, journalists and the public understand individual cases. These postings do not provide a comprehensive description of the law. In fact, they will surely contain statements that were true at the time but have become less valid as the law continues to develop.

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Blog powered by TypePad

« March 2007 | Main | June 2007 »

April 24, 2007

6 nations join Hague Convention on Child Abduction

Dave Jackson of Family Law Reporter recently reported to the ABA's International Family law Committee that:

"The U.S. has recently accepted the accessions of six countries to the Child Abduction
Convention: it will enter into force between the U.S. and Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania
on May 1, and El Salvador, Peru, and the Dominican Republic on June 1.
(The convention is currently in force between the U.S. and the following countries:

Continue reading "6 nations join Hague Convention on Child Abduction" »

April 10, 2007

Court in India issues injunction against U.S. divorce case

Divorce case: SC issues notice to US-based woman

Times of India 4/10/07

CHANDIGARH:
In a rare reiteration of its authority in a prayer for anti-suit injunction
matter concerning a foreign court, the Supreme Court has issued a notice to the
US-based wife of a Panchkula resident, who has filed a special leave petition
(SLP) against the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in dismissing
his plea for restraining his wife from divorce proceeding initiated in New
Jersey court.

Continue reading "Court in India issues injunction against U.S. divorce case" »

Divorce settlements, prenups gain popularity among Vietnam's new rich

Link: Viet Nam News Agency Article: "Divorce, Western Style"

April 09, 2007

Spanish mother remains jailed for abducting child to avoid visitation

Courtesy of the great New Jersey divorce lawyer and blogger Charlie Abut, a story about a standoff between Spanish and U.S. courts over custody jurisdiction and visitation enforcement:

Court rebuffs jailed mother
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Bergen Evening Record

Continue reading "Spanish mother remains jailed for abducting child to avoid visitation" »

Czech court reverses autistic boy's return to US

Czech Republic Rules Against Return of Autistic Boy to US in Part Because of His So-Called Mental Illness.

This Czech newspaper article's tone is disturbing: It sounds like the most of the sources the reporter talked to do not take the Hague Convention seriously.

Czech news article: Czech woman need not return ill son to father in USA — court.

Czech woman need not return ill son to father in USA -- court

http://www.ceskenoviny.cz/
04.04.2007

Brno- Czech woman Eva Macready need not return her mentally ill son Aiden Thomas, whom she brought to the Czech Republic as a little baby, to his father in the USA, and the boy can stay in his mother's care, the Czech Supreme Court has ruled, its spokesman Petr Knoetig confirmed to CTK today.

Continue reading "Czech court reverses autistic boy's return to US" »

April 06, 2007

Habitual Residence: Objective facts beat claimed agreement that residence is temporary

Maynard v. Maynard, USDC E. Mich. 3/21/07 is one of those cases where a family gave every indication of living in another country, but one spouse later claimed they were only doing so provisionally, with an agreement that they could move back to the U.S. in a year if it didn't work out. That's what the mother claimed when she took the kids back to Michigan, their former home state, after the family lived in Australia for 10 months. Fedeal Judge Patrick J. Duggan said that whether you look solely at the facts from the child's perspective, as in a long line of cases going back to Friedrich and Evans-Feder, or consider the parents' shared intent as in the   more recent Mozes case, Australia was these children's habitual residence. As that was the only issue in the case, the children were sent back to Australia. Even if there had been an agreement to come back to the U.S. if the wife didn't like Australia, such an agreement would not have kept Australia from being the habitual residence, the judge wrote.  Such a nebulous agreement "for an indefinite period" is fundamentally different from an agreement that a stay in a country is only for a certain defined time and purpose, he said. (Such as the family's earlier presence in Michigan, which was pursuant to a five-year employment contract with an Australian company.)

April 03, 2007

Roundup of current family law jurisdictional issues in the EU

Link: Family Law Week: Divorce & Foreign Affairs.