Application to return child — grave risk — intolerable situation — child's views — abduction — Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 105 & 106 — C v C 2 All ER 465 — Clarke v Carson (1996) 13 FRNZ 662 — re D (Abduction: Rights of Custody) [2006] 3 WLR 989 — H v H (1995) 13 FRNZ 498. A father sought the return of his son to the United States after he had been taken by the mother against the orders of the American Courts. The mother had traveled to New Zealand having told the court that she had no intention of visiting the country and had lodged a bond of $20,000 with the American Courts. The mother opposed the child being returned on the grounds that the child objected. Further, to return him to America posed a grave risk to the child as she would not return with him, which could risk his psychological health. The Judge examined a report made by a clinical psychologist who outlined research, the child's views and risks to the child were he to return to America without his mother and sibling. It was noted that the risk to the child had been created by the mother relocating to New Zealand and refusing to move back to America. However, the focus of the assessment was on the harm created by a forced return to the child not the behaviour of the parents. It was decided the high threshold of "grave risk of psychological harm or intolerable situation" set by the Hague Convention was not met. The child had lived in America for eight years, would have extended family nearby and could have contact via phone, social media and in holidays with his mother and sibling. There was also doubt the mother would not return to America along with her son. In regards to the child's objections to returning to America, they were not strong enough to counter the Court's obligation to return him. Although the child was genuine, he was really rejecting returning to America without his mother, not objecting to returning to America. His preference to living in New Zealand was based on superficial reasons, such as longer lunch breaks at school. As the mother failed to make out any defences, it was ordered that the child must be returned to America. Judgment Date: 20 March 2017. * * * Note: Names have been changed to comply with legal requirements * * *