Why is it important to act quickly and immediately on any suspicion of child abduction to another country in divorce? - Walla! Sentence

2021-09-19T05:23:00.751Z

International law dealing with the issue of children abducted by one of their parents in another country tends in favor of the parent whose children were abducted, but in order to take advantage of this bias one must act quickly and obtain appropriate legal advice

Sentence
family law

Why is it important to act quickly and immediately on any suspicion of child abduction to another country in divorce?

How did the court treat the request?

The court offered the parties access to mediation, but a mediation procedure failed, and the father approached the signed office above.

We offered him to immediately proceed with the lawsuit in court, but he delayed his decision and this led to the closure of the lawsuit.

After about a year he decided to go back and file the lawsuit in court, demanding that the children be returned to France.

His demands were based on the Hague Convention, which is the international convention dealing with the sensitive issue of transferring children without permission to another country as part of a divorce proceeding.

What does the Hague Convention say about child abduction?

A parent who decides to take his minor child out of his country of residence, and does so without the consent of the other parent and without his knowledge, is in fact kidnapping the child.

Even a case where the child leaves the country of residence with the knowledge and consent of the other parent, but is not returned at the end of the agreed period, will be considered a kidnapping for all intents and purposes.

The Hague Convention is the international law on the subject and it tends in favor of the parent whose children have been abducted from it.

The Convention stipulates that in such cases, the authorities of the two countries must work together to return the children to their country of residence.

However, there are exceptions where the court is not obliged to return the children, such as, for example, if it is proven that the parent from whom the child was abducted agreed to the transfer, or reconciled with the transfer after the fact, then the decision to return the child is at the court's discretion.

What were the mother's claims in response to the lawsuit filed by the father?

In the written defense, the mother claimed that the father agreed to the transfer of his children from France to Israel, knew about it, and even agreed to it while they were in France.

She also claimed that he gave his consent to their enrollment in a school in Israel and provided evidence to that effect.

Finally, she argued that even after the act the father came to terms with the situation.

How did the court rule?

After lengthy and arduous hearings, which lasted over 7 hours each, the court ruled that the evidence presented to him proved that the father did not agree to the transfer, did not know about it, and did not give his permission to do so.

The judgment held that all the evidence the mother brought regarding the father's consent to enroll in the school was incorrect.

In addition, it was determined that it was clearly proven that the mother lied to the father of her children and hid from him her intention to move to Israel.

This matter was proved, among other things, on the basis of the facts that the mother did not transfer her belongings from France, did not stop paying the rent there, and did not cancel the registration of the minors to the French school.

Therefore, the father had no ability to know about the plan, and certainly not to agree to the children moving to live with her in Israel.

Finally, the court even ruled that the mother commits acute parental alienation against the father.

Did the court order the return of the children to France?

Despite all this, the court ruled that the children would stay with their mother in Israel.

This is in light of Article 12 of the Hague Convention, which states that if 12 months have elapsed from the date of the abduction to the opening of the proceedings, and if the children have already been integrated into the new environment, the court will not order them back to the state and the other parent.

In this case, the court ruled that the principle of the best interests of the children requires not to disconnect them again from the new environment in which they were integrated so long after the transition took place.

Hence, that if the father had acted at the right time and in the right way then the children would have returned to France.

Why is it important to act quickly and not delay legal proceedings in the event of child abduction in divorce?

The Hague Convention, which focuses on restoring abducted children, tends to favor the parent from whom the child was abducted, and clearly, immediate action, without delay, is of paramount importance.

This is because as time goes on, the chances increase that the court will decide that the child's benefit is to stay in the new environment, even if he is displaced without permission and consent.

It is equally important to carry out the various procedures with the help of expert legal advice, in order to prevent the other party from taking various actions that will frustrate the possibility of the child's return, and ostensibly testify to the parent's consent.

Lawyer Elad Zamir
specializes in divorce proceedings in general and legal advice in cases of child abduction during divorce in particular.

Phone

: 058-4820820

Article courtesy of Zap Legal

The information presented in the article does not constitute legal advice or a substitute for it and does not constitute a recommendation for taking proceedings or avoiding proceedings.
Anyone who relies on the information in the article does so at his own risk

Share on Facebook
Share on WhatsApp
Share on general
Share on general
Share on Twitter
Share on Email

Source: walla

All news articles on 2021-09-19