USA – TX – TAZI – 2001. (Return ordered after six years)(Tolling of Time) The father removes the children from France and hid them from 1994 until found. The court found the respondent’s active concealment of the children’s whereabouts is the reason for the passage of time between removal and discovery and that the one year under the Convention’s Article 12 is Tolled (Also see Lops v Lops for tolling of time)
In the Interest of Tazi (District Court 2001)301st Judicial District, Dallas County, TX
Cause No. 00-22189-T/301st
3 International Abduction [US 2001]
==========================================================
IN THE DISTRICT COURT
3O1st JUDICIAL DISTRICT
DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
Cause No. 00-22189-T/301st
26 Jan 2001
IN THE INTEREST OF:
IBRAHIM TAZI, a.k.a. BRIAN TAZI
and
YOUSSEF TAZI, a.k.a. HENRY TAZI
MINOR CHILDREN
FINAL ORDER REGARDING THE CHILDREN
PURSUANT TO THE HAGUE CONVENTION
001 On January 22, 23, 24 and 25, 2001, came on for trial on
the merits, the Petitioner, NACIRA-SAMLA SAICH’S, First
Amended Petition for Return of Children Pursuant to Hague
Convention, PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS, AND IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, SUIT AFFECTING THE PARENT CHILD RELATIONSHIP.
002 Petitioner, NACIRA-SAMIA SAICHI, appeared with her
attorney of record, Victoria Welcome. Respondent, MOHAMED BEN
AHMED TAZI, a.k.a. MOHAMMED BEN AHMED. a.k.a. ADAM TAZI
appeared with his attorney of record. Janice McCorkel. All
parties and witnesses were sworn in and placed under the Rule,
and present in Court for all proceedings.
003 The children the subject of this suit are:
1. IBRAHIM TAZI, a.k.a. BRIAN TAZI, date of birth,
04/17/1989; and
2 YOUSSEF TAZI, a.k.a. HENRY TAZI, date of birth,
02/19/1992 hereinafter the ‘Children’
004 The Court finds:
1. that on July 1, 1988, the 1980 Hague Convention on
the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction
(“Convention”) entered into force between the
United States and France;
2. the International Child Abduction Remedies Act, 42
U.S.C. Section 11601 – 11610 (l988)(“ICARA”)
implemented the Convention in the United States;
3. the Central Authority of France has submitted to
the Central Authority of the United States an
application for the return of the Children to
France.
005 The Court finds that this Court has jurisdiction of this
cause pursuant to the Hague Convention, 42 U.S.C. 11603(a) and
Texas Family Code, Chapter 152, section 152.105 [Editor’s
Note: International Application of Chapter, the UCCJEA] The
Court finds that France and the United States are Contracting
nations or Signatory parties to the Hague Convention, which
confer this Court with subject matter jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction was not disputed.
006 The court finds that the trial on this matter was held
expeditiously pursuant to Article 11 of the Convention.
007 The Court finds France to have been the Habitual
Residence of the children immediately before and at the time
of the wrongful retention and wrongful removal by the Father.
The Court finds that the children were unilaterally removed
from France by the Father and taken out of the family and
social environment in which their life developed.
008 The Court gives Full Faith and Credit to the Judicial
Separation Order of December 2, 1994 from the French Court,
the Tribunal De Grande Instance of Rennes, France; the Divorce
Decree of October 12, 1995 from the same Court and the
Judgment issued on January 24, 1997 by the Conventional
Chamber of the Supreme Court of Rennes, finding Respondent in
willful disobedience or contempt of its Tribunal Correctional
(Court of Petty Sessions), hereinafter the “French Orders”.
The Court finds that the Petitioner was awarded custody of the
children and the Respondent was awarded no visitation rights
or access to the Children.
009 The Court finds that the Petitioner has diligently
pursued the location of her children for their return to
France since at least October of 1994 and that the Respondent
set upon a course of conduct since August 1994 to secret the
children from the Mother. The Court finds that the Respondent
has intentionally, deliberately and actively concealed the
whereabouts of the children since that time by many means and
was less that truthful in his testimony in open Court.
010 The Court finds the children were wrongfully removed and
wrongfully retained from France and that the Respondent’s
active concealment of the children’s whereabouts is the reason
for the passage of time between removal and discovery and that
the one year under the Convention’s Article 12 is Tolled.
011 THEREFORE, the Court cannot legalize the factual
situation which the Father has brought about and ORDERS the
immediate return of the children INSTANTER to the CUSTODY of
the MOTHER according to the French Orders and ORDERS that
Petitioner return to Rennes, France with the children by
February 2, 2001.
012 The Court ORDERS that the Respondent Father has no
possession or custody rights with the children, in accordance
with the French Orders.
013 Attorneys fees and costs per the Convention are reserved
and set for a hearing on Feb. 15, 2001 at 3:00 p.m.
014 SIGNED this the 26th day of January, 2001.
/s/ Susan A. Rankin
JUDGE PRESIDING
SUSAN A. RANKIN