[Germany][Petition granted][Grave risk of Harm][Ameliorative measures]
In Radu, v. Shon, 2022 WL
4099225, (District Court, D. Arizona, 2022) on December 30, 2021, the Court
granted Petitioner Bogdan Radu’s Petition for Return of Children to Germany.
Respondent appealed and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded for the
Court to reconsider its ruling in light of Golan v. Saada, __ U.S. __,
142 S. Ct. 1880 (2022). The Court held a
further evidentiary hearing and contacted the United States Department of State
for assistance. On December 30, 2021, the Court again ordered Respondent to
return O.S.R. and M.S.R. to Germany. The Court recognized that this is “a
borderline case whether an Article 13(b) finding is warranted.” The Court
further found that the alternative remedy of ordering Respondent to return with
O.S.R. and M.S.R. to Germany would ameliorate the risk of psychological harm to
O.S.R. and M.S.R. given the unique circumstances of this case, including
Germany’s child protection services, the ability of a German court to
prioritize child custody matters for expedited processing pursuant to Section
155 of the Act on Proceedings in Family Matters and Matters of Non-Contentious
Jurisdiction, Respondent’s joint custody rights under German law, Respondent’s
ability to stay in Germany for at least three months, and Petitioner’s
commitment to paying, if necessary, for the airfare of O.S.R. and M.S.R., as
well as rent for a separate residence for Respondent and the children until a
German court makes a custody determination. On June 15, 2022, the
United States Supreme Court issued Golan, holding that “consideration of
ameliorative measures” after an Article 13(b) finding is not required under the
Convention but, rather, “is within a district court’s discretion.” 142 S. Ct. at
1893. The Supreme Court also clarified that
a district court’s consideration of ameliorative measures (1) “must prioritize
the child’s physical and psychological safety,” (2) must “not usurp the role of
the court that will adjudicate the underlying custody dispute,” and (3) “must
accord with the Convention’s requirement that the courts act expeditiously in
proceedings for the return of children.” “[A] district court reasonably may
decline to consider ameliorative measures that have not been raised by the
parties, are unworkable, draw the court into determinations properly resolved
in custodial proceedings, or risk overly prolonging return proceedings.” The Court, in its discretion, found that
consideration of ameliorative measures was appropriate in this case, and the ameliorative measure set forth in its
December 30, 2021 Order—namely, that Respondent return with O.S.R. and M.S.R.
to Germany—satisfied the requirements outlined in Golan.
No comments:
Post a Comment