Summary
In case of an international child abduction, the hearing of the child – which was already provided for by Article 12 of the 1989 New York Convention on the Rights of the Child – is not required, pursuant to Article 7(3) of Law No 64/1994, in proceedings for the return of the child to his/her original habitual residence even if it is thought that said hearing has become essential, unless it appears inappropriate having regard to the age or degree of maturity of the child, as now specifically provided for by Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, Article 13 of the Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on International Child Abduction and Articles 3 and 6 of the Strasbourg Convention of 25 January 1996 on the Exercise of Children’s Rights. The hearing of a child who has understanding has a cognitive value, since its outcome may allow the court to directly assess whether there is a grave risk for the child that his/her return would expose him/her to psychological harm or otherwise place him/her in an intolerable situation pursuant to Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention. Although the child’s objection to being returned cannot constitute the exclusive basis for rejecting the application, it is an element strengthening the view of the court that the child would suffer a prejudice, which is independent and sufficient ground to derogate from the general principle requiring his/her immediate return.