Copeland v. Copeland, 134 F.3d 362 (4th Cir. Feb. 6, 1998)
http://www.hcch.net/incadat/fullcase/0239.htm
Blondin v. Dubois, 189 F.3d 240 (2d Cir. 1999)
Appeal allowed and case remitted to the District Court to consider remedies that might allow both the return of the children to their habitual residence and their protection from harm pending a custody hearing in France.
Re M. (A Minor), 10 August 1995, transcript, Court of Appeal
Appeal dismissed and return ordered; the retention was wrongful as the child was habitually resident in France at the relevant date.
Ancel v. Turkey, Requ?te no 28514/04
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-91367
5P.322/2002/frs
Recours d?clar? irrecevable ; le p?re n’avait pas d’int?r?t pratique et actuel ? l’annulation.
Maire v. Portugal, Requ?te no 48206/99, (2006) 43 E.H.R.R. 13
Breach of Article 8 of the ECHR and award of damages. The Portuguese authorities had failed to take sufficient or adequate measures to ensure respect for the father’s right to have his son returned.
LM v MM Nevo, RFamA 2338/09
Appeal dismissed and return order upheld; the retention was wrongful the child being habitually resident in France at the relevant date, and none of the exceptions had been established to the standard required under the Hague Convention.
Bundesverfassungsgericht, 2 BvR 6/99, 3 May 1999
Unanimous: no infringement of the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz).
Supreme Court of Finland 1996:151, S96/2489
Return ordered; the removal was wrongful and the standard of harm required under Article 13(1)(b) had not been made out.
Couderc v. Czech Republic, Requ?te n?54429/00