The High Court closed Irish proceedings concerning a child’s return from Poland after none of the four respondents filed the notice of motion required within three months of notification.
The case arose after the Minister for Justice and Equality, acting as Ireland’s Central Authority, received a final non-return order made by the Polish District Court of L. on 5 October 2012. The Minister began these proceedings under Article 11(6) of the EU’s Brussels IIa Regulation. The documents supplied to the Central Authority indicated that the child had probably been habitually resident in Ireland before being taken to Poland.
On 24 April 2013, the High Court directed that respondents wishing to make submissions on custody had to issue a notice of motion, supported by affidavit, seeking relief under the Guardianship of Infants Act 1964 or other relief within the court’s jurisdiction. The court set a three-month deadline from notification.
The mother and father were served on 26 April 2013. The maternal great-grandparents, with whom the child was living in Poland, were served there on 4 June. No respondent appeared at the listed hearings or issued a notice of motion by 4 September. The great-grandparents sent two written documents directly to the High Court, one received on 15 July and another received on 9 September, after the hearing on the Central Authority’s application to close the case.
The great-grandparents argued, among other things, that Irish courts no longer had custody jurisdiction and sought to justify the child’s continued stay with them in Poland. The judge considered their documents but held that they were not submissions made in the form required by the court’s directions and Irish law. Article 11(7), the judge said, required the court to close the case where no submissions were received within the time limit.
The judge left open whether the court had discretion to extend the deadline, reserving that question for another case. She concluded that an extension was not justified here. Closing these proceedings did not alter the child’s living arrangements. The judge said the closure would fulfil the condition in Article 10(b)(iii) of the Regulation, meaning Irish courts would no longer retain jurisdiction over parental-responsibility matters concerning the child.
The court ordered the proceedings to be treated as heard otherwise than in public and the judgment to be published with identifying details removed. The Central Authority and respondents may transmit the full judgment, proceedings and orders to Poland for relevant proceedings. The Central Authority was directed to post a copy of the judgment and order to each respondent.