Re Y (a child) (abduction: undertakings given for return of child) [2013] All ER (D) 133 (Jan)
The terms of Arts 23, 24, 26 and 28 of the 1996 Hague Convention (Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children 1996), when they referred to “measures”, were plainly to be construed broadly rather than narrowly. For a common law jurisdiction, such and England and Wales, to say that “undertakings” were not “measures” would have been onerous and would be devoid of practical sense. Those who initiated the 1996 Hague Convention would, by the date of its arrival, have been familiar with the wide use of undertakings amongst the member states who were operating the 1980 Hague Convention (the Hague Child Abduction Convention 1980). The whole purpose of the 1996 Hague Convention was to support and to supplement the effective operation of the 1980 Hague Convention. Insofar as undertakings were widely used for the expression of protective measures under the 1980 Hague Convention, it was unremarkable that the 1996 Hague Convention would have continued to put into
