<p>This by implication would mean that the best way to prevent child abduction is to desist from international marriages and moving abroad.The modern reality is that&nbsp / relationships are being formed internationally. In the same breath, relationships are easily un-formed and the family fractured. The emotional impact of any breakup is usually&nbsp / tense, and it follows by implication that this will be exacerbated if a child is involved. For reasons that will be expounded on in the thesis, many caregivers, usually mothers have&nbsp / opted to abduct their children. Some have opted to apply formally to relocate. Relocation disputes are widely regarded as one of the most controversial and difficult issues in&nbsp / family law internationally. These disputes usually arise pursuant to a relational breakdown, when the resident parent (usually the mother) seeks to relocate with the children&nbsp / either&nbsp / domestically or internationally. This causes a significant impact&nbsp / on contact arrangements with the other parent (usually the father). Depending on the country in which they find themselves and the laws applicable to relocation with the child, mothers are faced with the decision to remove the child either lawfully or wrongfully. International family law&nbsp / jurisprudence has been developed over time to assist with custody and relocation disputes. &lsquo / Much has been written on the Hague Convention &ndash / its flaws and its successes, its&nbsp / effectiveness and utilization. This thesis aims to look specifically at relocation disputes within the context of international parental child abduction / more specifically, it sets out to&nbsp / explore whether there is a link between those phenomena, and whether the Hague Convention is sufficient for dealing with relocation disputes. I hope to make a convincing&nbsp / argument that if there were an international instrument regulating relocation, there would be uniformity and consistency. People&rsquo / s confidence in the legal processes would be&nbsp / restored, motivating them to apply formally to relocate and, in doing so, the incidence of child abductions would be reduced.</p>

The concept of inter-country adoptions was reintroduced into the South African legal sphere in The Minister of Social Welfare and Population Development v Fitzpatrick 2000 3 SA 422 (CC), where the constitutionality of section 18(4)(f) of the Child Care Act 74 of 1983, which prohibited inter-country adoptions, was successfully challenged. The decision evoked criticism from all around the world, some in favour of inter-country adoptions and others not. In considering this decision, one also has to keep in mind section 28(1)(b) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 which affords every child the right to family care or parental care, or to appropriate alternative care when removed from the family environment. The aim of this paper is to investigate the inner workings of inter-country adoptions, which are regulated by the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption of 1993 and, nationally, the Children’s Act 38 of 2005. These findings will then be relayed back to the ‘best interests of the child’ principle to determine whether inter-country adoption is in the best interests of the child, or not. / Thesis (LLM (Comparative Child Law))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2013.

The concept of inter-country adoptions was reintroduced into the South African legal sphere in The Minister of Social Welfare and Population Development v Fitzpatrick 2000 3 SA 422 (CC), where the constitutionality of section 18(4)(f) of the Child Care Act 74 of 1983, which prohibited inter-country adoptions, was successfully challenged. The decision evoked criticism from all around the world, some in favour of inter-country adoptions and others not. In considering this decision, one also has to keep in mind section 28(1)(b) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 which affords every child the right to family care or parental care, or to appropriate alternative care when removed from the family environment. The aim of this paper is to investigate the inner workings of inter-country adoptions, which are regulated by the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption of 1993 and, nationally, the Children’s Act 38 of 2005. These findings will then be relayed back to the ‘best interests of the child’ principle to determine whether inter-country adoption is in the best interests of the child, or not. / Thesis (LLM (Comparative Child Law))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2013.

[pt] O Direito Internacional Privado, tendo como eixo axiológico o homem, é um dos mais importantes instrumentos da ciência jurídica no reconhecimento e preservação da dignidade e dos direitos humanos. Em se tratando de família, essa propriedade vem sendo notada no decorrer de sua história, fornecendo ao homem a oportunidade de ter sua dignidade respeitada das mais diversas formas. A uniformização e a codificação do Direito Internacional Privado, através da composição de grandes ambientes de debates e negociação, como a Convenção Permanente da Haia, possibilitam o respeito às diferenças culturais e sociais. Consequentemente, no momento da construção da melhor lei a ser aplicada ou até mesmo da lei material adotada pela Convenção, constrói-se um conjunto normativo sólido e legítimo que fornece ao indivíduo sua promoção. / [en] The Private international law, having as the axiological axis the man, is one of the most important tools of legal science in the recognition and preservation of dignity and human rights. When it comes to family, this property has been recognized in the course of its history, giving the man the opportunity to have their dignity respected in many different ways. The standardization and codification of Private International Law, through the composition of large spaces of debate and negotiation, as the Permanent Convention Hague, allow respect for cultural and social differences. Consequently, during the construction of the best law to be applied or even the substantive law adopted by the Convention, it s built a solid and legitimate set of rules that provides promotion to the individual.

Magister Legum - LLM / This by implication would mean that the best way to prevent child abduction is to desist from international marriages and moving abroad.The modern reality is that relationships are being formed internationally. In the same breath, relationships are easily un-formed and the family fractured. The emotional impact of any breakup is usually tense, and it follows by implication that this will be exacerbated if a child is involved. For reasons that will be expounded on in the thesis, many caregivers, usually mothers have opted to abduct their children. Some have opted to apply formally to relocate. Relocation disputes are widely regarded as one of the most controversial and difficult issues in family law internationally. These disputes usually arise pursuant to a relational breakdown, when the resident parent (usually the mother) seeks to relocate with the children either domestically or internationally. This causes a significant impact on contact arrangements with the other parent (usually the father). Depending on the country in which they find themselves and the laws applicable to relocation with the child, mothers are faced with the decision to remove the child either lawfully or wrongfully. International family law jurisprudence has been developed over time to assist with custody and relocation disputes. ‘Much has been written on the Hague Convention – its flaws and its successes, its effectiveness and utilization. This thesis aims to look specifically at relocation disputes within the context of international parental child abduction; more specifically, it sets out to explore whether there is a link between those phenomena, and whether the Hague Convention is sufficient for dealing with relocation disputes. I hope to make a convincing argument that if there were an international instrument regulating relocation, there would be uniformity and consistency. People’s confidence in the legal processes would be restored, motivating them to apply formally to relocate and, in doing so, the incidence of child abductions would be reduced. / South Africa

Within the context of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments the recognition and enforcement of foreign custody orders is unique. By reason of the fact that custody orders are always modifiable "in the best interests of the child" they cannot be regarded as final orders and are thus not capable of recognition and enforcement on the same basis as final orders. The failure of courts to afford foreign custody orders recognition and enforcement in the normal course has created the potential for a person deprived of the custody of a child to remove the child from the jurisdiction of a court rendering a custody order to another jurisdiction within which he or she may seek a new, more favourable order. This potential for behaviour in contempt of an existing order has been exploited by numerous parents who feel aggrieved by custody orders. The problem of parental child snatching has escalated to such a degree that the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction was drawn up to introduce uniform measures amongst member states to address this problem. Despite being a meaningful step in the fight against international child abduction the Hague Convention does not fully resolve the problem. For this reason other measures have been suggested to supplement the Convention. The different approaches taken in South Africa, the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America to recognition and enforcement of foreign custody orders and the measures to overcome the problem of international child abduction are examined and a comparative methodology applied to the design of a model approach for South Africa. The object of this model is to permit the South African courts to address the international child abduction problem without falling prey to any of the pitfalls experienced elsewhere in the legal systems examined. / Law / LL.D.

The thesis investigates the extent to which cross-border taking of evidence in civil and com-mercial matters in relation to Switzerland, South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda is allowed. Such evidence-taking is not only governed by the domestic law of the state seeking evidence abroad and that of the state where the relevant means of proof are located, but also by public international law, and more specifically by the concept of sovereignty. The ad-missibility of the cross-border taking of evidence under public international law depends on whether or not evidence-gathering in civil litigation is regarded as a judicial act, which violates sovereignty when performed on foreign territory, or as a purely private act. In the first case, the evidentiary material has to be obtained through channels of international judicial assistance. Such assistance can either be rendered based on the basis of an international treaty, or through courtoisie internationale. No international judicial assistance is necessary in cases of a so-called “transfer of foreign evidence”, provided no compulsion is applied which infringes the sovereignty of the foreign state. The thesis analyses the taking of evidence abroad based on the Hague Evidence Convention, and the Hague Procedure Convention. It further expounds how evidence located in Switzer-land, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda can be obtained for the benefit of civil proceed-ings pending abroad in the absence of any relevant international treaty. The thesis also exam-ines under what conditions a litigant in civil proceedings in the aforementioned countries may request evidence to be taken on foreign soil. The position of cross-border taking of evidence in civil and commercial matters in the said countries is assessed, and suggestions are made on how such status quo may be improved. The thesis makes an attempt to establish the basic prin-ciples for a convention on evidence-taking in civil and commercial matters between South Af-rica, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda. The development of such principles, however, is only possible once the similarities and differences in the procedure for the taking of evidence and the means of proof in the relevant laws of the aforesaid countries have been identified. / Public, Constitutional, & International / LL.D.

Avec la croissance des familles binationales, les divorces et séparations des époux donnent souvent lieu aux problèmes d’enlèvement parental d’enfant : l'un d’eux décide de déplacer l'enfant à l'étranger sans le consentement de l'autre afin de se faire accorder le droit de garde par un juge étranger plus clément. Des instruments juridiques internationaux tendent à résoudre ce problème d’enlèvement international d’enfants par le mécanisme de retour immédiat. La Convention de La Haye du 25 octobre 1980 sur les aspects civils de l'enlèvement international d'enfants est l'instrument principal qui est ratifié par un grand nombre d'États. Son effectivité dépend de la conformité de l'application par les États. Autrement dit, il est important d'interpréter des termes principaux et des exceptions de la Convention de manière conforme, voire similaire. Pour ce faire, le principe est l'interprétation autonome des notions de la Convention. Outre que la question d'interprétation de la Convention, l'attention est aussi portée sur l'exécution de l'ordonnance de retour. Cette exécution est en effet encadrée par l'obligation de célérité et elle requiert en même temps une forte coopération entre les autorités judiciaires et administratives entre les deux États concernés. Les États sont donc invités à donner effet aux ordonnances de retour à travers les différentes mesures, y compris les mesures coercitives. Cependant, la remise volontaire de l'enfant reste la meilleure solution qui doit être favorisée, notamment à travers le recours à une procédure amiable telle que la médiation familiale internationale. / With the increase of binational families, the divorces and separations between the married couple always give rise to problems of parental child kidnapping: one of them decides to remove the couple's child abroad, without consent of the other, with a view to having the child custody awarded by more clement foreign judges. International legal instruments tend to solve this problem of international child abduction through the summary return mechanism. The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, as the main instrument, is now ratified by a great number of States. Its effectiveness depends on the compliance of the application of the Convention by member States. In other words, it is important for member States to interpret the Convention terms in the way to comply with the other. In doing so, the proposed principle must be the autonomous interpretation of the Convention terms. In addition to the issue of interpretation, attention must also be placed on the enforcement of return orders. This enforcement must be guided by the celerity obligation. At the same time, the enforcement of return orders requires a strong cooperation between judicial and administrative authorities of the States involved in each abduction case. The States are, thus, invited to give effect to return orders by taking different measures, including coercive ones. However, voluntary return of the abducted child is always the best solution that must be favored, especially through the use of amicable settlement between the parties, such as the international family mediation.

The thesis investigates the extent to which cross-border taking of evidence in civil and com-mercial matters in relation to Switzerland, South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda is allowed. Such evidence-taking is not only governed by the domestic law of the state seeking evidence abroad and that of the state where the relevant means of proof are located, but also by public international law, and more specifically by the concept of sovereignty. The ad-missibility of the cross-border taking of evidence under public international law depends on whether or not evidence-gathering in civil litigation is regarded as a judicial act, which violates sovereignty when performed on foreign territory, or as a purely private act. In the first case, the evidentiary material has to be obtained through channels of international judicial assistance. Such assistance can either be rendered based on the basis of an international treaty, or through courtoisie internationale. No international judicial assistance is necessary in cases of a so-called “transfer of foreign evidence”, provided no compulsion is applied which infringes the sovereignty of the foreign state. The thesis analyses the taking of evidence abroad based on the Hague Evidence Convention, and the Hague Procedure Convention. It further expounds how evidence located in Switzer-land, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda can be obtained for the benefit of civil proceed-ings pending abroad in the absence of any relevant international treaty. The thesis also exam-ines under what conditions a litigant in civil proceedings in the aforementioned countries may request evidence to be taken on foreign soil. The position of cross-border taking of evidence in civil and commercial matters in the said countries is assessed, and suggestions are made on how such status quo may be improved. The thesis makes an attempt to establish the basic prin-ciples for a convention on evidence-taking in civil and commercial matters between South Af-rica, Botswana, Namibia, Nigeria, and Uganda. The development of such principles, however, is only possible once the similarities and differences in the procedure for the taking of evidence and the means of proof in the relevant laws of the aforesaid countries have been identified. / Public, Constitutional, and International / LL.D.

Within the context of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments the recognition and enforcement of foreign custody orders is unique. By reason of the fact that custody orders are always modifiable "in the best interests of the child" they cannot be regarded as final orders and are thus not capable of recognition and enforcement on the same basis as final orders. The failure of courts to afford foreign custody orders recognition and enforcement in the normal course has created the potential for a person deprived of the custody of a child to remove the child from the jurisdiction of a court rendering a custody order to another jurisdiction within which he or she may seek a new, more favourable order. This potential for behaviour in contempt of an existing order has been exploited by numerous parents who feel aggrieved by custody orders. The problem of parental child snatching has escalated to such a degree that the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction was drawn up to introduce uniform measures amongst member states to address this problem. Despite being a meaningful step in the fight against international child abduction the Hague Convention does not fully resolve the problem. For this reason other measures have been suggested to supplement the Convention. The different approaches taken in South Africa, the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States of America to recognition and enforcement of foreign custody orders and the measures to overcome the problem of international child abduction are examined and a comparative methodology applied to the design of a model approach for South Africa. The object of this model is to permit the South African courts to address the international child abduction problem without falling prey to any of the pitfalls experienced elsewhere in the legal systems examined. / Law / LL.D.