M.K. v R.M. (Child Abduction: Custody and Retention of Children, Non-contracting State to the Hague Convention) (Approved)

������������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������������[2022 No.10 HLC]

1.2������ The Court�s jurisdiction is limited in this case.� The Respondent, whose presence at each hearing was via video link and was voluntary as he could not be compelled to attend from Egypt, resists the application.� The children are now in Egypt and, even if the Court does direct their return, the Respondent has indicated that he will not return to Ireland and that his sons will remain in Egypt.� Thus, the main Order sought is not enforceable.�

2.4������ The cases in which similar issues have arisen confirm the Court�s view that principles of the Hague Convention are not to be applied, by analogy, to non-Convention cases. In S.K. v. A.L. [2019] IECA 177 [47], Whelan J said:

2.6������ The Applicant has also pleaded that the children should be returned under the relevant Irish legislation. Part II of the Guardianship of Infants Act 1964 sets out the relevant jurisdiction in section 3 as follows:

� Where in any proceedings before any court the custody, guardianship or upbringing of an infant � is in question, the court, in deciding that question, shall regard the welfare of the infant as the first and paramount consideration. �