As a parent coordinator, divorce, and family law attorney, as well as a parent coordinator, I see as our borders are becoming ever more “fluid” and as we move to a more “global” economy and world, the Hague Convention and International Child Abduction Remedies Act is becoming much more significant and more readily used in intercontinental custody battles and to prevent the abduction of children.

            The Hague Convention protects children and their families against the risks of irregular, illegal or premature or ill-prepared adoptions abroad … a system in place of cooperation among countries to guarantee that these safeguards are represented and prevent the abduction or sale or trafficking of children even if it is by one of the parents. The Hague Convention Act can be used to prevent a parent from absconding with the child to either hide a child or establish custody in another country. There was a recent case in which the court upheld the Hague Convention. The name of the case was Schram v. Zarak, 1:21-CV-06524 (November 2). A couple met in New York in 2013, the mother was an Iceland citizen, and the father was a Mexican citizen.  They married in 2015 and had two children. By 2017, the family relocated to Iceland. On July 20, 2021, Zarak took children E.Z. and S.Z., citizens of Iceland and the United States, Age 7 and 2, with her to New York for a family reunion. Instead of returning to Iceland with E.Z. and S.E., Zarak instituted divorce proceedings. Invoking the Hague Convention and International Child Abduction Remedies Act, the father Schram sought the children’s return. Granting his petition, the district court found Schram proved by preponderance of the evidence that S.Z. and E.Z. were habitual residents of Iceland when Zarak removed them to New York.  The parties shared intent to abandon New York and to relocate indefinitely to Iceland. Within weeks of moving to Iceland, Zarak tried to sell her New York apartment and the parties bought an apartment in Reykjavic.  Also, E.Z. was enrolled in a school within walking distance from the family’s Reykjavic home, made friends in Iceland and took part in several extracurricular activities. While in Iceland, the children also strengthened their ties to father Schram’s family.  The father was granted the children’s return to Iceland and the children were allowed to remain in Iceland.

 In these cases, it is very important to determine what the intent of the parties were and where the children have had the greatest connection to a particular place. This also goes to the best interest test, which is part and parcel of any custody determination. I believe we will be seeing more of these cases in the future.