International child abduction (Hague Convention 1980)

Wrongful removal or retention of a child abroad — emergency procedure under the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 and the 1996 Convention. Action within 24-48 hours.

A child wrongfully removed from Switzerland to another country, or retained abroad after a holiday, without the consent of the parent holding the right of custody, falls within the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980. Speed is the single most important variable. Every week of delay weakens the application; passing the one-year mark opens an exception that may permanently anchor the child in the new country.

The first 24 to 48 hours

If you discover that the child has been wrongfully removed or is not returning at the agreed date, do the following before any other action:

  1. Document the timeline. Exact date and time of the departure or of the missed return, the child’s habitual residence before the event, holders of parental authority and custody. Save SMS, e-mails, plane tickets.
  2. Contact a lawyer with Hague-Convention experience. Within 24-48 hours, not a week.
  3. File a return application with the Federal Office of Justice (FOJ), the Swiss Central Authority, or directly with the Central Authority of the State where the child is located.
  4. Apply for conservatory measures in Geneva — Tribunal de protection de l’adulte et de l’enfant (TPAE): prohibition to leave the territory, airport flag, passport block.

Our procedure page goes step by step : International child abduction — Hague 1980.

What “wrongful” means under Hague 1980

Article 3 of the 1980 Convention requires two cumulative elements:

  • a removal or non-return of the child;
  • in breach of a right of custody actually exercised by a person, institution or body, under the law of the State in which the child was habitually resident immediately before the removal or retention.

A parent who shares parental authority cannot lawfully relocate the child across the border without the other parent’s consent or a court order. The threshold is the habitual residence, not the nationality or the official domicile.

The return rule and its exceptions (art. 13)

The default outcome is the immediate return of the child to the State of habitual residence. The judge of the State of refuge does not examine the question of custody on the merits; that question is decided after return, by the home court.

Article 13 lists narrow exceptions:

  • (a) the petitioner was not actually exercising the right of custody, or had consented or acquiesced to the removal;
  • (b) there is a grave risk that the return would expose the child to physical or psychological harm or place the child in an intolerable situation;
  • the child’s objection, where the child has reached an age and degree of maturity at which it is appropriate to take its views into account.

Federal Tribunal case law applies these exceptions strictly. A mere preference for the new environment is not sufficient; a vague allegation of abuse without medical or social evidence is not sufficient.

Coordination with Hague 1996

The Hague Convention 1996 on parental responsibility coordinates jurisdiction, applicable law and recognition of measures concerning children. It complements Hague 1980 by clarifying which court will rule on the underlying custody questions after the return — typically the court of the State of habitual residence immediately before the removal.

Cross-border conservatory measures

In parallel with the return application, several measures can be triggered in Geneva:

  • TPAE order prohibiting the parent from leaving the territory with the child;
  • Airport flag through the SPOC (single point of contact) for international family matters;
  • Passport block at the federal office of police;
  • Preventive custody attribution to the parent in Switzerland.

These measures buy time without prejudging the merits of the custody question.

Common errors to avoid

  • Do not attempt self-help recovery abroad. Forcibly retaking the child outside the legal framework turns the petitioning parent into a wrongful taker in the eyes of the foreign court.
  • Do not sign a “temporary trip” authorisation in panic. It can be read as consent under art. 13(a) — defeating the return application.
  • Do not wait for a “spontaneous return”. The statistics from the Federal Office of Justice show that spontaneous returns past four to six weeks are rare.
  • Do not file in the wrong forum first. A French custody filing started before the Hague return application can complicate the lis-pendens analysis. The Hague track must come first.

What you receive

  • An immediate situation assessment, by phone if needed, within 24 hours.
  • The return application filed with the FOJ.
  • A simultaneous conservatory-measure petition before the TPAE.
  • Coordination with a correspondent attorney in the State of refuge and, where appropriate, with the public prosecutor.
  • Tracking of the 6-week target timeline imposed by art. 11 of the Convention.

If you are in an emergency, call the firm immediately. Action must begin within 24 to 48 hours.

Urgent action — call now