Allan Hirsch

The applicant mother sought the return of her four-year-old child to Virginia under the Hague Convention, alleging wrongful retention by the respondent father in Ontario.

The father conceded the retention was technically wrongful but argued the application was brought more than a year after the retention and the child was 'now settled' in Ontario under Article 12.

The court found the child had been living exclusively with the father for over two years in a stable environment, contrasting with the mother's history of substance abuse and child protection involvement.

The court concluded the child was settled in her new environment and dismissed the application for return.

The father brought an application under the Hague Convention for the return of the parties' three-year-old son to the United Kingdom.

The mother admitted to wrongfully removing the child to Canada but opposed his return, arguing that returning him would expose him to a grave risk of harm due to the father's alleged domestic violence, pursuant to Article 13(b).

The court reviewed the evidence of past violence and involvement of child protection authorities in the UK, concluding that the mother failed to establish that the alleged violence was severe, likely to recur, or life-threatening.

The court ordered the child's return to the UK.

Following an order returning the parties' children to England under the Hague Convention, the successful applicant father sought costs of $32,000.

The respondent mother argued each party should bear their own costs.

The court found the father was presumptively entitled to costs and acted reasonably, while noting the mother breached the parties' agreement by retaining the children in Canada.

The court awarded the father costs of $21,920.93, inclusive of legal fees, disbursements, and travel expenses.

Following a successful application under the Hague Convention ordering the return of the parties' child to Brazil, the applicant father sought costs of $13,500.

The respondent mother argued costs should be limited to $3,500.

The court reviewed the factors under Rule 24 of the Family Law Rules, finding the father's legal fees and disbursements, including a Voice of the Child Report, to be largely reasonable.

The court fixed costs payable by the mother to the father at $9,960.18 inclusive of HST and disbursements.

The applicant father sought the return of his 12-year-old child to Brazil under the Hague Convention, alleging wrongful retention by the respondent mother in Ontario.

The mother conceded the retention was wrongful but raised defences under Article 13, arguing a grave risk of harm and that the child objected to returning.

The court found insufficient evidence of a grave risk of physical or psychological harm.

While acknowledging the child was mature and objected to returning, the court concluded the child's reasons were not substantial enough to meet the exceptional circumstances required to override the mandatory return provisions.

The application was granted and the child was ordered returned to Brazil.

The applicant father sought the return of his two children to England under the Hague Convention.

The mother had moved to Canada with the children under a temporary relocation agreement but later refused to return them.

The court found that the children were habitually resident in England, the father had custody rights which he was exercising, and he did not consent or acquiesce to their permanent relocation.

The court rejected the mother's defences under Articles 12 and 13 of the Hague Convention, finding no grave risk of harm.

The application was granted and the children were ordered returned to England.