Posts
Jeremy D. Morley
An Australian
court has ordered the Russian mother of an Australian child may take the child
for annual visits to Russia despite the objections of the Australian father who
asserted that although the Federation of Russia is a state party to the Hague
Abduction Convention there are practical difficulties associated with its
enforcement of the Convention. The court conditioned the visits on the mother’s
delivery of security in the form of a Transfer of Land in registrable form
having a specified minimum value. Jarrard
& Jarrard [2015] FamCA 1143 (18 December 2015).
The court
commendably outlined the fundamental issue as follows: “The issues around
international travel for the child in this case require a balancing of the best
interests of the child in being immersed in his Russian heritage which includes
culture, language and relationships with extended family, including the
maternal grandparents and extended family, residing in Russia, with the risk of
him failing to return to Australia, being separated from the father and
prevented from having a meaningful relationship with him.” Based on the
evidence before him, the judge ruled that the facts favored authorizing the
visits.
However, what is notable about the case is that, as in
so many such cases of potential international child abduction, the extremely
serious issue of the potentially left-behind parent’s claims concerning the
lack of compliance by the foreign country with the terms of the Hague
Convention, and the delays and expenses that might arise in such a case, were
entirely unsupported by expert evidence.
