Golan v. Saada

The Court decided that the Hague Convention (a treaty on international child-return disputes) does not categorically require a court to consider every possible protective step before refusing to return a child facing a grave risk of harm.

The decision affects parents and children in international custody disputes. For example, a court that finds a child could face serious physical or psychological harm is not required to examine every possible protection that might allow a return.

The Supreme Court has finished its action in this case. Courts handling future Hague Convention disputes will apply this conclusion when considering requests to return children.

The Court said courts are not categorically required to consider every possible protective measure before refusing a child's return after finding a grave risk.

Parents and children in international return disputes under the Hague Convention (a treaty on child return) are affected. Courts may consider protective steps but need not examine every option.

The Supreme Court has finished the case. Lower courts will apply its conclusion in future Hague Convention disputes involving a claimed grave risk to a child.