Parenting orders — return of child — risk of psychological harm — intolerable situation — parental influence — Care of Children Act 2004, ss 6, 105 & 106 — Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (Hague Convention) — LRR v COL [2020] NZCA 209 — White v Northumberland (2006) 26 FRNZ 189 — Summer v Green [2021] NZHC 3111 — Secretary for Justice v HJ [2007] NZFLR 195 — Basingstoke v Groot [2007] NZFLR 363. The parties were the parents of a young boy, and disagreed on his parenting arrangements. The Court's task was to decide whether the dispute was to be heard in the United States, where the applicant mother lived, or in New Zealand where the respondent father lived and where the child had been since mid-2021. The applicant submitted that the child had been wrongfully retained in New Zealand, while the respondent argued that to return the child to the US would expose him to psychological harm or otherwise place him in an intolerable situation. The respondent alleged that the applicant and her former husband had abused the child when he was living with them in the US. However the applicant had now ended her relationship with her former husband and had protective orders against him. Also, it was not for the Court to make a judgment on the adequacy of child protection measures in the US. The Court found that the respondent had not established that returning the child to the US would expose him to psychological harm or to an intolerable situation. The respondent also submitted that the child objected to being returned and that he was old and mature enough for his views to be taken into account. The Court found that the child's age was a factor, but was not determinative. The child's family situation in the US should have improved now that the applicant had ended her relationship with her former husband. There was nothing to suggest that the applicant had used excessive corporal punishment against the child throughout his life. Also, the child's views could have been influenced by the respondent. The Court found that little weight could be attached to the child's views. The Court declined to exercise its discretion to order the child remain in New Zealand. The Court ordered the child's return to the US to allow the American courts to determine his long-term care arrangements. Judgment Date: 7 June 2022 * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *