What defenses exist to a Hague Convention application seeking a child's return?

The Hague Convention sets out a small number of narrow, specific defenses to an application for a child's return, and the general approach is that return is the default outcome unless one of these defenses is clearly established. They include: the grave risk defense, where return would expose the child to a grave risk of physical or psychological harm or otherwise place them in an intolerable situation; a defense based on the other parent's consent to, or later acceptance of, the move; a defense that the child themselves objects to being returned and has reached an age and maturity where their views should be considered; and a defense available after a significant period has passed showing the child has become settled in their new environment.

Each of these defenses is interpreted narrowly, since the Convention's purpose is to discourage unilateral removals and quickly restore the situation that existed before the wrongful removal, rather than to relitigate the underlying parenting dispute in the new country. Raising a defense successfully generally requires clear, specific evidence, not general assertions. Anyone facing or bringing a Hague application should get specialized legal advice quickly given how narrow and fact-specific these defenses are.