Sentencia nº 120/2002 (Sala Primera); N?mero de Registro 129/1999. Recurso de amparo
“Amparo” granted by the Constitutional Court which mandated the Court of Appeals to decide on the merits of the appeal.
Central Authority, RSA v. OCI [2010] JOL 25947 (GSJ)
http://www.justice.gov.za/hague/caselaw/2010_iguwa_10-15111.pdf
Family Advocate, Cape Town, and another v EM 2009 (5) SA 420 (C)
Retention wrongful and return ordered, subject to conditions; none of the exceptions had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.
Central Authority of the Republic of South Africa and Another v B 2012 (2) SA 296 (GSJ)
Retention wrongful but return refused in the light of the child’s objections.
KG v. CB & others (748/11) [2012] ZASCA 17
http://www.justice.gov.za/sca/judgments/sca_2012/sca2012-017.pdf
Pennello v. Pennello [2003] 1 All SA 716 (N)
Appeal allowed and return refused; Article 13(1)(b) had been proved to the standard required under the Convention.
Re G. (Abduction) (Rights of Custody) [2002] 2 FLR 703
Article 15 declaration granted; the removal was wrongful being in breach of inchoate rights of custody.
L?pez Gui? v. Slovakia (Application No 10280/12)
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-144355
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.
Serghides c. Pologne (Requ?te No 31515/04)
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-101487