The Court of Appeal has upheld an order requiring a child, identified as N., to return to country A, where custody proceedings between her parents remain ongoing. It dismissed the mother’s appeal and the father’s cross-appeal, leaving the High Court’s terms and conditions in place.
The appeal concerned the High Court’s decision that the child had been wrongfully brought to Ireland in 2023. The High Court accepted that the mother’s evidence, considered cumulatively, established grave risk under the Hague Convention. It nevertheless found that protective measures available in country A adequately addressed that risk. It also found that the child objected to returning but had reservations about whether her views were independently formed.
The Court of Appeal found no error in the High Court’s assessment of protection. It noted that authorities in country A had imposed restrictions on contact and provided the mother with 24-hour police protection after her 2023 complaint. The appeal judgment also identified two breaches of the contact restrictions: a video of the mother’s residence in Ireland and a message sent in September 2023. The court considered those breaches in context and concluded they did not show that the arrangements in country A would be inadequate after the child’s return.
The court also upheld the High Court’s treatment of the child’s objections. An assessor had reported that the child expressed strong views against returning but appeared committed to a specific account, became distressed when gently challenged, and gave views that lacked nuance and detail. The Court of Appeal said the High Court was entitled to give weight to that assessment and to evidence that the child had previously appeared to have a good relationship with her father.
The judgment discussed disputed allegations about events in country A and at an airport in June 2025. The father denied the mother’s account of the assessment-day encounter. The court said the airport events did not establish a breach of the protective order and did not affect the appeal’s outcome.
The father’s cross-appeal sought to reduce from €5,000 to €3,000 the sum he was ordered to provide toward accommodation for the mother and child on their return. The Court of Appeal found the amount not excessive and dismissed that cross-appeal as well. The order for the child’s return therefore stands, subject to the High Court’s original terms and conditions.