This section deals with the situation whereby a parent asks an Israeli court for permission to relocate abroad with children – after the minors have been returned to Israel, following successful legal proceedings brought overeas ,by the other parent, for child abduction. What are the chances for a parent who returned with his/her child to Israel, after losing in Hague Convention child abduction proceedings,being allowed by an Israeli court to relocate abroad legally ?
Relocation of Minor – After Abduction
Question:
Does a mother who has returned to Israel against her will with a very young child after Hague Convention abduction proceedings abroad have a chance of getting permission from an Israeli court to raise the youngster abroad after all ?
Answer:
Yes, the fact that a return order was granted under the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction does not in itself automatically prevent her from getting permission to raise the young child abroad. A family court which examines her pleas for custody and relocation will ultimately examine whether the move would, given all the circumstances, be in the child’s good. Child abduction proceedings under the Hague Convention do not examine the minor’s good – and this is their main drawback.
Where the mother wishes to relocate, and is the child’s main carer, and the minor is very young, courts tend to be receptive to relocation as it is felt that minors of tender age should be with their mother. This holds where the child is under 6. However, the court will examine the mother’s “visitation record” since her return to Israel very carefully and will want to see that she has honoured and encouraged contact between the minor and his non-custodial parent . A mother whose young child is returned under the Hague Convention must “bend over backwards” to facilitate contact between the minor and the father so as to counter arguments that if she is allowed to raise him abroad she will not honour visitation. A court allowing relocation after abduction will be careful to examine proposals and willingness for contact, the mother’s record following the return to Israel, and set penalties and guarantees before it grants permission in the face of opposition.
'Revolutionary' Judgment – Relocation After Abduction Without Financial Guarantees
Question:
Can a parent who abducted a minor from Israel, gain legal custody of that child after it is returned under Hague Convention proceedings … and permission to relocate abroad, or would prohibitive financial guarantees be demanded ?
Answer:
Although a parent applying in Israel for custody and relocation of a minor following an abduction will not face an easy task, it is possible to succeed. The central test will be whether it is in the "child's good", something that child abduction proceedings under the Hague Convention do not deal with in principle. Usually , however, high financial guarantees are set.
However, in November 2004 a mother of a three year old who had been sent back to Israel following Hague Convention abduction proceedings in the UK in 2003, in the Re B (a Minor) Case, gained custody and permission to relocate with the minor to England from Tel Aviv Family Court. The mother was represented by Advs . Amihoud and Louise Borochov and no financial guarantees were set, the court accepting the mother's arguments that she was unable to produce them.
After the judgment was read out to the parties, the father's counsel objected, demanding guarantees, but the mother's counsel said that setting guarantees would render the relocation judgment theoretical as they could not be obtained. The court stressed that it had not set guarantees on purpose because of the mother's economic situation. It accepted her arguments that she had kept to the visitation schedule set following their return to Israel,and that reports prepared by professionals it had appointed, said that the mother was committed to visitation and the importance of the child having contact with the father.
Mother's relocation Judgment Withstands Appeal but Guarantees Set
Question:
Can an Israeli appeal court interfere in a ruling allowing relocation of a minor by setting or increasing financial guarantees to ensure visitation ?
Answer:
Certainly ! This happened in November 2007 when Tel Aviv District Court rejected a father's appeal against a custody and relocation judgment , but set guarantees for visitation. In November 2004 , in a landmark decision, Tel Aviv Family Court had granted the mother (then represented by Adv. Amihoud Borochov) custody of the parties' two year old daughter, and permission to relocate to her native England with her, without setting financial guarantees to ensure that visitation set would take place. The District Court rejected the father's appeal against the rulings on custody and relocation . It held that on the basis of the evidence presented the family court had made the correct judgment, but in retrospect, because of problems with visitation, it should have set guarantees, and ordered the mother , who was unrepresented and did not attend the hearing, to deposit $10,000 in the court safe, and ordered legal costs against her.
tel: 03-5234133, 077-3500000
fax: 03-5232251