Fathers who are not married to their child’s Mother, and whose name does not appear on their child’s birth certificates are at risk of having lesser rights in the event that the child’s mother leaves the country without their knowledge and consent.
These Fathers are already disadvantaged as they do not have Parental Responsibility without a court order or a parental responsibility agreement, but a recent decision in the Supreme Court (Re K ( A child) (Northern Ireland) (2014) UKSC 29 has significantly reduced the unmarried Father’s opportunity to use the Hague convention to seek an early return of their child to the UK.
The Hague Convention is a very powerful and effective tool where a child is abducted and taken out of the jurisdiction of the “home” court. If an application is made within 12 months of the removal of the child the convention can require the mandatory return of the child in cases of wrongful removal. The loss of the opportunity to use the convention’s powers is, therefore, a serious blow to any Father who finds himself in the position of the Mother having disappeared taking the child with her.
Having contact with a child and/or having a parental role may no longer give a Father sufficient “custody rights” to be afforded the protection of the Hague Convention. The case of Re K has narrowed and refined those rights which now appear to be available only to a fairly narrow category of unmarried Fathers who have had sole care of the child up until the date of the abduction.
There is a glimmer of hope in that the convention does have provision to enforce contact, even though there is no way of arguing for an immediate return.
The lesson to be learned by unmarried Fathers must be to obtain an order for Parental Responsibility, especially in circumstances where there has been a relationship breakdown and the mother of the child is not a UK national.
0 Comments