The implications of Office of the Children’s Lawyer v Balev 2018 scc 16 for the interpretation of ‘habitual residence’ in the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (1980)

H. K. Saldulker
{"title":"The implications of Office of the Children’s Lawyer v Balev 2018 scc 16 for the interpretation of ‘habitual residence’ in the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (1980)","authors":"H. K. Saldulker","doi":"10.47348/jsac-iawj/2023/a7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (1980) is aimed at securing the prompt return of children wrongfully removed to or retained in any contracting state so that the rights of custody and access under the laws of the contracting state are effectively respected. This case note discusses the implications of Office of the Children’s Lawyer v Balev 2018 SCC 16 for the interpretation of the words ‘habitual residence’. The case adopts a hybrid approach instead of a parental intention or a child-centred approach. The hybrid approach is premised on a fact-based inquiry which takes into account the actual circumstances of the child’s life. Using this approach, a judicial officer considers all connections and circumstances, namely, the child’s links to and the circumstances in country A, the circumstances surrounding their move to country B, and the child’s circumstances and environment in country B. Other considerations such as the reasons for the child’s stay and the circumstances of the parents are also relevant. This method envisages a purposive approach into the inquiry for the prompt and expeditious return of the children.","PeriodicalId":422606,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the South African Chapter of the International Association of the Women Judges","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the South African Chapter of the International Association of the Women Judges","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/jsac-iawj/2023/a7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (1980) is aimed at securing the prompt return of children wrongfully removed to or retained in any contracting state so that the rights of custody and access under the laws of the contracting state are effectively respected. This case note discusses the implications of Office of the Children’s Lawyer v Balev 2018 SCC 16 for the interpretation of the words ‘habitual residence’. The case adopts a hybrid approach instead of a parental intention or a child-centred approach. The hybrid approach is premised on a fact-based inquiry which takes into account the actual circumstances of the child’s life. Using this approach, a judicial officer considers all connections and circumstances, namely, the child’s links to and the circumstances in country A, the circumstances surrounding their move to country B, and the child’s circumstances and environment in country B. Other considerations such as the reasons for the child’s stay and the circumstances of the parents are also relevant. This method envisages a purposive approach into the inquiry for the prompt and expeditious return of the children.
儿童律师办公室诉Balev案(2018 scc 16)对《海牙国际诱拐儿童民事问题公约》(1980年)中“经常居所”解释的影响
《关于国际儿童诱拐民事方面的海牙公约》(1980年)旨在确保被非法带到任何缔约国或被非法扣留的儿童迅速返回,以便缔约国法律规定的监护权和探视权得到有效尊重。本案例说明讨论了儿童律师办公室诉Balev 2018 SCC 16对“惯常居所”一词解释的含义。该案件采用混合方法,而不是父母的意图或以儿童为中心的方法。混合方法的前提是基于事实的调查,考虑到儿童生活的实际情况。司法官员采用这种办法,考虑到所有的联系和情况,即儿童与a国的联系和情况,他们移居B国的情况,以及儿童在B国的情况和环境。其他考虑,例如儿童逗留的原因和父母的情况,也是有关的。这一方法设想在调查中采取一种目的明确的办法,以便儿童迅速返回。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书