Jeremy D. Morley
Having represented numerous clients in international child custody matters concerning India, this author has been accepted on several occasions as an expert on international family law matters concerning India.
The author
is aware of seven cases in which courts in the United States, Canada and
England have refused to allow visits to India because India has no system for
returning internationally abducted children.
In the
first five of these cases this author testified as an expert witness that India
was a safe haven for international child abduction and the courts in question
relied to a significant extent on my testimony.
The cases
are as follows:
a. Mahadevan
v. Shankar, 2010 ONSC 5608, 2010 CarswellOnt 8537. The Superior Court in
Ontario, Canada ruled that the father of a four-year-old child living in
Ontario should not be permitted to take the child on a family visit to India.
b. Balakrishna
v. Murali, FA104042105. July 18, 2012, The Superior Court in New Haven,
Connecticut ruled that the mother of a young child living in Connecticut should
not be permitted to take the child on a family visit to India.
c. Brahmbhatt
v. Brahmbhatt, Case No. CL 2012-0000736. September 25, 2012. The Circuit Court
of Fairfax County, Virginia, USA in ruled that the mother of a young child
living in Virginia should not be permitted to take the child on a family visit
to India.
d. Shroff
v. Shroff, Court File No. E111400. May 8, 2013. The Supreme Court of British
Columbia, Canada determined that a child’s mother should not be permitted to
take the parties’ child to India.
e. Paruchuri
v. Vadlamudi, Case No. HF12651692 (February 27, 2014). The Superior Court of California,
County of Alameda barred relocation or travel to India.
f. Katare
v. Katare, 175 Wash.2d 23, 283 P.3d 546 (Wash. en banc, 2012). The Supreme
Court of Washington, en banc, upheld a determination that the husband presented
a serious risk of absconding to India with his children.
g. Re
AB (A Child: temporary leave to remove from jurisdiction: expert evidence;
[2014] EWHC 2758 (Fam). An English court ruled that while a child of Indian
heritage should normally have the opportunity to spend time in India, the
consequences of a refusal by the mother to return the child were such that the
balance came down against granting the mother’s application.