the hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction in cases involving ...

140 Pages·2017·2.61 MB·English

GOLDMAN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY
T H C
HE AGUE ONVENTION ON THE
C A I
IVIL SPECTS OF NTERNATIONAL
C A C
HILD BDUCTION IN ASES
I A
NVOLVING LLEGATIONS OF
D A
OMESTIC BUSE

A New York Bench Guide for Federal and State Court Judges
T H C C
HE AGUE ONVENTION ON THE IVIL
A I C
SPECTS OF NTERNATIONAL HILD
A C I B
BDUCTION IN ASES NVOLVING ATTERED
R
ESPONDENTS

A New York Bench Guide for
Federal and State Court Judges
The Hague Domestic Violence Project and the New York Hague Convention and Domestic
Violence Bench Guide Consulting Committee has developed this Bench Guide, The Hague
Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction in Cases Involving Battered
Respondents, for both federal and state court judges in New York who are confronted with a
petition for return pursuant to the Hague Convention in cases involving domestic violence.
Please visit www.haguedv.org for more information about the Hague Domestic Violence Project
and for more resources on the Hague Convention and domestic violence.

May 2017
This project was supported by Grant No. 2015-TA-AX-K038 awarded by the Office on Violence
Against Women, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and
recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.
BENCH GUIDE CONSULTING COMMITTEE
The Honorable Thérèse Wiley Dancks The Honorable Deborah A. Kaplan, J.S.C.
United States Magistrate Judge Statewide Coordinating Judge for Family
Northern District of New York Violence Cases
Committee Co-Chair New York State Unified Court System
Committee Co-Chair

Jeffrey L. Edleson, Ph.D. Janet Fink, Esq.
Dean and Professor Deputy Counsel
School of Social Welfare, UC Berkeley New York State Unified Court System

Lea Haber Kuck, Esq. Dorchen A. Leidholdt
Partner Director
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Center for Battered Women’s Legal Services
Sanctuary for Families

Joan G. Levenson, Esq.
Chief of Staff
Office of the Statewide Coordinating Judge for
Family Violence Cases
New York State Unified Court System

PRO BONO TEAM LIAISON
Maria da Silva
Law Clerk
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

HAGUE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROJECT
Jessica S. Goldberg, Esq. Sudha Shetty, Esq.
Project Attorney Assistant Dean, Project Director
Goldman School of Public Policy, UC Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy, UC Berkeley

Special thanks: We could not have developed this Guide without the insightful and substantive
feedback we received from each member listed above—and for that we will be forever grateful.
A big thanks to the amazing pro bono team from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP—
Maria da Silva, Grace Jun, Victoria Abraham, Monica DeBosscher, Molly Delaney, Raul
Garcia, and Misha Tsukerman—for their diligent and hard work researching, editing, and
revising multiple drafts of this Guide. We want to thank Nicole Fidler, Pro Bono Supervising
Attorney at Sanctuary for Families, for her additional feedback and aid in reviewing the Guide.
And finally yet importantly, we want to acknowledge the logistical support and assistance we
received from Ms. Lauren Nassikas, Associate Director at the Office on Violence Against

Women.
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of
International Child Abduction in
Cases Involving Battered Respondents

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction and Domestic
Violence At-A-Glance ................................................................................................................. i
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. iv
Glossary ......................................................................................................................................v
Flowcharts ................................................................................................................................ ix
Part I. Overview, Jurisdiction, and Procedure ............................................................................1
§ 1.00 The Hague Convention and ICARA...........................................................................1
§ 2.00 Jurisdiction Over a Hague Convention Case ..............................................................2
2.1 Contracting States and Treaty Partners .......................................................................3
2.2 The Role of the Central Authority ..............................................................................4
2.3 Stay of Custody Proceedings ......................................................................................5
2.4 Removal and Abstention ............................................................................................6
2.5 Full Faith and Credit, Res Judicata, and Collateral Estoppel ......................................8
2.6 The Role of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act
(UCCJEA) .................................................................................................................9
2.7 International Treaties and the Supremacy Clause ..................................................... 10
§ 3.00 Elements of a Hague Convention Case .................................................................... 10
§ 4.00 When the Convention Does Not Apply .................................................................... 13
§ 5.00 Procedure ................................................................................................................ 13
5.1 Authority ................................................................................................................. 13
5.2 Petitioner Commences the Action ............................................................................ 14
5.3 Expedited Nature of Proceedings ............................................................................. 16
5.4 Case Management and Provisional Remedies........................................................... 18
5.5 Notice and Service ................................................................................................... 19
5.6 Intervention ............................................................................................................. 20
5.8 Preemptive Stay or Dismissal................................................................................... 23
5.9 Discovery, Evidence, and the Evidentiary Hearing ................................................... 23
5.9.1 Article 30: Authentication ................................................................................ 24
5.9.2 Expert Witnesses .............................................................................................. 25
5.9.3 Foreign Law ..................................................................................................... 26
5.10 Attorney Fees and Costs .......................................................................................... 27
5.11 Appeals.................................................................................................................... 30
5.11.1 Emergency Motion to Stay Return ................................................................ 30
5.11.2 Standard of Review: Federal Courts .............................................................. 30
5.11.3 Standard of Review: New York State Courts ................................................. 31
Part II. Considering Domestic Violence in a Hague Convention Case...................................... 32
§1.00 Patterns and the Domestic Context .......................................................................... 34
§2.00 Effects on Children .................................................................................................. 36
Part III. Petitioner’s Case for Return ........................................................................................ 38
§ 1.00 Elements of Petitioner’s Prima Facie Case .............................................................. 39
§ 2.00 Removal, Retention, and Habitual Residence ........................................................... 39
2.1 Removal .................................................................................................................. 40
2.2 Retention ................................................................................................................. 40
2.3 Habitual Residence .................................................................................................. 41
2.3.1 Habitual Residence in New York ...................................................................... 43
2.4 Habitual Residence and Domestic Violence ............................................................. 44
2.5 Conditional Moves................................................................................................... 45
§ 3.00 Rights of Custody .................................................................................................... 46
3.1 Under the Law of the Habitual Residence ................................................................ 46
3.2 Chasing Orders ........................................................................................................ 47
3.3 Ne Exeat Rights ....................................................................................................... 48
3.4 Rights of Custody vs. Rights of Access .................................................................... 48
§ 4.00 Rights Actually Exercised ....................................................................................... 48
Part IV. Exceptions to Return: Respondent’s Defenses ............................................................ 49
§ 1.00 Evaluating the Exceptions without Engaging in a Best Interests Analysis ................ 49
§ 2.00 Article 12: The “Well-Settled” Exception ................................................................ 50
2.1 One-Year Requirement ............................................................................................ 50
2.2 “Well-Settled” in New Environment ........................................................................ 51
2.3 Discretion to Return ................................................................................................. 53
§ 3.00 Article 13(a): Consent and Acquiescence ................................................................. 53
3.1 Consent.................................................................................................................... 54
3.2 Acquiescence ........................................................................................................... 55
§ 4.00 Article 13(b): Grave Risk and Intolerable Situation ................................................. 55
4.1 Past Physical Abuse to the Child .............................................................................. 58
4.2 Exposure and Co-Occurrence ................................................................................... 59
4.2.1 Relevant Social Science .................................................................................... 60
a. Exposure .......................................................................................................... 60
b. Co-Occurrence ................................................................................................. 62
4.3 Intolerable Situation ................................................................................................. 62
4.4 Ameliorative Measures and the Court’s Discretion................................................... 63
4.4.1 Requested State’s Ability to Protect Child ........................................................ 64
4.4.2 Undertakings and Mirror Orders ....................................................................... 65
a. Undertakings and Domestic Violence ............................................................... 67
§ 5.00 Article 13: Mature Child’s Objection to Return ....................................................... 69
5.1 Age and Level of Maturity ....................................................................................... 70
5.2 Weight of Child’s Objection .................................................................................... 71
5.3 Relevant Evidence ................................................................................................... 72
§ 6.00 Article 20: Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ............................................ 73
Part V. Case Notes .................................................................................................................. 75
Procedure: Discovery, Evidence, and the Evidentiary Hearing............................................... 75
Habitual Residence: The Date of Removal or Retention ........................................................ 76
Determining Habitual Residence ........................................................................................... 77
Habitual Residence and Domestic Violence .......................................................................... 79
Custody Rights Actually Exercised ....................................................................................... 80
Article 12: “Well-Settled” in New Environment .................................................................... 80
Article 12: Mature Child Objection ....................................................................................... 82
Article 13(b): Past Physical Abuse to the Child ..................................................................... 83
Article 13(b): Exposure and Co-Occurrence .......................................................................... 84
Article 13(b): Requested State’s Ability to Protect Child ....................................................... 87
Article 13(b): Undertakings and Domestic Violence .............................................................. 88
Part VI. Hypothetical Case Scenarios ...................................................................................... 90
Index ....................................................................................................................................... 103

Appendices
Appendix A ............................................................................................ Hague Convention Text
Appendix B ............................................................................................................. ICARA Text
Appendix C ..................................................................................................... Sample Language
Appendix D ............................................................................... Pérez-Vera, Explanatory Report
Appendix E .............................................................. State Department, Text and Legal Analysis
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of
International Child Abduction and Domestic Violence
At-A-Glance
The Guide’s central focus is the relationship between domestic violence and the Hague Convention in
cases where the taking parent is alleged to have been psychologically or physically abused by the left-
behind parent.
This Guide refers to parental abduction and parental custody rights, but either or both the parties may be
someone other than a parent.
This Guide is applicable to:
■ Petitions filed pursuant to the Hague Convention;
■ Petitions filed in U.S. courts (state or federal); and
■ Petitions seeking return of a child to his or her habitual residence.
This Guide is NOT applicable to:
■ Cases involving rights of access (also referred to as access cases);
■ Cases in which the child has been removed from or retained outside of the United States; or
■ Cases in which the left-behind parent is a victim of domestic violence.
A. SOURCES
The Hague Convention, Appendix A, is an international treaty intended to protect children by providing
a civil legal framework for return to their habitual residence when they are wrongfully removed or
retained across international borders.
International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA), Appendix B, is the federal legislation
implementing the Convention in the United States.
Central Authority: Article 6 of the Convention directs each Contracting State to designate a Central
Authority to facilitate the Convention’s implementation. In the United States, the U.S. State Department’s
Office of Children’s Issues (OCI) serves as the Central Authority. OCI’s website has a resource page for
judges that includes links to primary resources, links to related criminal and civil laws, and information
about the International Hague Network of Judges.
Further Guidance:
1. Elisa Pérez-Vera, Explanatory Report, Appendix D, is recognized as the official history and
commentary to the Hague Convention. Courts often look to this report for guidance in
interpreting the Convention, although it was never adopted as part of the Convention.
2. U.S. State Department’s Text and Legal Analysis, Appendix E, is the State Department’s legal
analysis of the Convention. Like the Explanatory Report, courts have looked to the Text and
Legal Analysis for support in treaty interpretation.
i
B. ELEMENTS OF A HAGUE CONVENTION CASE
3 STEPS:
1. DOES THE COURT HAVE JURISDICTION?
2. WAS THE TAKING WRONGFUL?
3. DO ONE OR MORE OF THE 5 EXCEPTIONS TO MANDATORY RETURN APPLY?
Courts should articulate their findings and the standards applied in their rulings.
(1) JURISDICTION
The court has jurisdiction if:

■ The child was removed from or retained outside of a country that is a Contracting State to the
Convention and a Treaty Partner with the United States;
■ The child is under the age of 16;
■ The child is located in the state and county or federal district of the court; AND
■ The child is not the subject of any other Hague Child Abduction proceeding.
Removal from state courts—Both state and federal district courts have original and concurrent
jurisdiction in cases arising under the Convention. If the petitioner files a Hague Convention petition in
state court, the respondent has the right, pursuant to the federal removal statute, to file a notice of removal
in federal district court.
Abstention by federal courts—If the Hague Convention case has already been raised and litigated in
state court, abstention by the federal court would be appropriate. If the Hague Convention case has not
been raised, or has been raised but not litigated in state court, courts have largely found abstention
doctrines do not apply. An ongoing state court custody proceeding does not require abstention by the
federal court.
(2) WRONGFUL
The taking is wrongful if the petitioner proves the following by a preponderance of the evidence:
■ Habitual Residence—that the child was removed or retained from his or her country of habitual
residence [“Habitual residence” has not been defined in the Convention or ICARA but should be
given its “ordinary meaning.”]; AND
■ Custody Rights—that the removal or retention was in breach of the petitioner’s custody rights [The
petitioner’s rights under the authority of the child’s habitual residence—through law, judicial or
administrative decision, or legal agreement—must amount to “custody rights” within the meaning of
the Convention]; AND
■ Custody Rights Actually Exercised—that those custody rights were actually exercised at the time of
removal or retention or would have been exercised but for the removal or retention [Did the petitioner
keep or seek to keep any sort of regular contact with the child.].

ii