Current 5 Hague Cases
This paper will explore current Hague convention cases, all from 2014, and explain each case in detail. Five cases will be cited: Vilchis v. Hall, Bobadilla v. Cordero, Murphy v. Sloan, Ermani v. Vittori, and Buenaver v. Vasquez.
In Vilchis v. Hall, Vilchis (mother) and Hall (father) were the parents of two school age daughters. Vilchis was a native of Mexico, and a Mexican citizen. When she was a teenager, Vilchis emigrated to the U.S, with her family to reside in Illinois. She lived in Illinois as an illegal immigrant. Hall, a native of Illinois, was a native of the United States. Together, Vilchis and Hall had a daughter in 2007; a second was born the following year. Both girls were U.S. Citizens. In October 2010, Vilchis intended to move the entire family to Mexico, and the family did arrive in Mexico in October 2010. One month later, Hill took the children to the U.S. and lived in a shelter in San Diego.
It was clear to the court that prior to Vilchis, Hall, and the children leaving Illinois, the children’s primary residence was the U.S. The court’s main question was, whether the children’s primary residence changed to Mexico at any time between 2010 and 2012. The court decided that the answer to that question was “no”. The court found that Vilchis could not prove the children’s primary residence in 2012 was Mexico, so she was unable to prove Hall’s removal of the children from Mexico was illegal, under the meaning of Article 3 of the Hague Convention.
In Bobadilla v. Cordero, the district court found that a Federal court has the ability to return a child, if that return was in alignment with the goals of the Hague Convention. Mr. Cordero abducted their son, knowing the child’s mother, Ms. Bobadilla, was not financially or legally able to enforce her rights as a parent.
In Murphy v. Sloan, the parents were married and had a daughter in 2005. As the marriage disintegrated, Murphy (the child’s mother) suggested she return to her native Ireland with their daughter, so Murphy could pursue a Master’s degree, and to provide an international education for the daughter. While in Ireland with the daughter, without Sloan’s consent, Murphy removed the daughter from school prematurely, to visit the Maldive Islands. Murphy and the daughter were in the Maldives long enough for the daughter to miss nineteen days of school. Sloan visited Ireland to visit, and the couple agreed that Sloan would return to the U.S. for a time. One week after returning to the U.S., Sloan informed Murphy he did not intend to return their daughter to Ireland. In September 2013, Murphy filed a petition for the daughter to be returned to Ireland. In October 2013, the couple’s marriage was dissolved. Murphy invoked the Hague Convention, informing the court that Ireland was the daughter’s primary residence. Murphy’s request was denied. The court found that the last time Sloan and Murphy had a shared intent; it was that the daughter resides in California.
In Ermani v. Vittori, the parents were both natives of Italy. The court found that the trauma of separating a minor child from therapy for autism is serious enough to apply the Convention’s stated exceptions, and denied the parent’s application for return. The court also ruled that the minor child faced a potential risk of psychological and physical harm, which are implied by a disease like autism.
In Buenaver v. Vasquez, both parents were married in Colombia in 2005, and divorced 2009. The father knew and approved of the mother taking the minor child to the U.S. temporarily to visit family. When the minor child had not returned to Colombia by the agreed-upon date, the mother stated she would not return the child to Colombia. The court ruled that the mother had not proven the minor child was settled in the U.S, and the father’s petition was granted to return the child to Colombia.