An appeals court for the city of Saint Petersburg held in Thompson v. Thompson (12/21/16) that
return would expose the child to a grave risk of harm within the meaning of Art. 13(1)(b) because a child of the age of three needs to be cared for by her mother. The Court relied on Principle 6 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1959, which states that "a child of tender years" should not be separated from her mother other than in exceptional circumstances, and on the fact that the mother did not intend to return to Spain.
The Court added that since the minor was now settled in the Russian Federation, her retention there was not unlawful. [Even though the Hague case was filed only four months after the abduction.]
Furthermore, the Court referred to Art. 65 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, which requires that parents exercise their rights in a way which is consistent with the best interests of the child. In its written decision, no reference was made to the foreign case law presented by the father, but during the hearing, one of the judges commented that the arguments based on the case law of the ECtHR were not relevant because the Russian Federation does not have a precedent-based legal system.
The father even offered "undertakings to provide separate accommodation and support for the mother and the child in Spain".
Stuff like this may be why the U.S. has not brought the Convention into force between itself and Russia.
The father has appealed to the European Court of Human Rights.
From English synopsis on Incadat database
Comments