Court Denies Return of Children to Germany Under Hague Convention: A Closer Look at Goderth v. Yandall-Goderth

In a pivotal decision, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied a father’s petition under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, ruling that two children wrongfully retained in the U.S. should not be returned to Germany.

The petitioner sought the return of his children to Germany, their country of habitual residence, after they remained in the United States following a scheduled family visit. The Hague Convention helps protect children from international parental abduction and provides a legal framework to return children wrongfully removed or retained from their home country.

Case Overview

This Hague Convention decision denied the petitioner’s request to return his two minor children to Germany. Despite establishing a prima facie case of wrongful retention, the court found the children were “well-settled” in their new environment in the United States, an exception under the Convention that ultimately prevented their return.

Unlike many Hague Convention cases that result in the child’s return, this case illustrates how exceptions can alter the outcome, particularly when petitions are filed more than one year after the alleged wrongful act.

What Role Did the Hague Convention Play?

The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is a multilateral treaty designed to deter and rectify international child abductions. In Goderth v. Yandall-Goderth, the Convention provided the legal structure for evaluating:

• Habitual Residence: The court determined that Germany was the children’s habitual residence, where they had lived since birth, attended school, and were socially integrated.
• Wrongful Retention: The court found that the children were wrongfully retained in the U.S. beyond their scheduled return flight in August 2023, without the petitioner’s clear consent.
• Custody Rights: Under German law, both parents had joint custody. The court ruled the petitioner was actively exercising those rights when the children remained in the United States.
• Well-Settled Exception: Because the petition was filed more than one year after the wrongful retention, the court applied the “well-settled” defense. It found that the children were fully integrated into life in the U.S. – attending school, participating in extracurriculars, and living in a stable home with their extended family.

While the Convention typically focuses on the procedural aspects rather than substantive custody rights, this case highlights how exceptions such as the well-settled defense can significantly affect the outcome.

Why This Case Is Unusual

Hague Convention cases often proceed to trial and involve deeply contested facts, particularly about consent, habitual residence, and potential risks upon return. In this case, the parties presented extensive evidence and witness testimony during a two-day hearing, but the outcome hinged not on who had custody, but whether the children were settled in the U.S.

The respondent’s argument, that she had the petitioner’s verbal consent for a one-year move, conflicted with the petitioner’s assertion of temporary travel. Ultimately, the court ruled that, regardless of that dispute, the children’s integration into their new life in Illinois triggered the well-settled exception.

This resolution demonstrates how timing and post-move circumstances, like enrolling in school and establishing community ties, can block a return, even in clear cases of wrongful retention.

Court Findings

The court made several key findings:

• The children’s habitual residence was Germany, where they had lived since birth with both parents and participated in school and community life.
• The petitioner had joint custody rights under German law and was exercising those rights through ongoing communication and visitation.
• The date of wrongful retention was August 30, 2023, when the petitioner learned the children were enrolled in school in the U.S., signifying they would not return as scheduled.
• The petition, filed on September 9, 2024, was outside the one-year window required for automatic return under the Convention, triggering the “well-settled” exception.
• The children were found to be well-settled in the U.S., with strong school engagement, family support, extracurricular involvement, and a stable home life.

Case Results

The court denied the petitioner’s request for the return of the children to Germany. While the petitioner established wrongful retention under the Hague Convention, the court concluded that the children were well-settled in their new environment. As a result, the Convention did not require their return.

Date of Decision: July 7, 2025

Hague Convention Law with Masters Law Group

At Masters Law Group, we understand the emotional and legal complexities of international parental child abduction cases. Our attorneys, Erin E. Masters and Anthony G. Joseph, have extensive experience representing clients in Hague Convention cases governed by the International Child Abduction Remedies Act (ICARA).

If you are facing a child abduction matter or need to enforce or defend against a Hague Convention petition, we are here to help you navigate this challenging process.

📞 Contact us today to schedule a complimentary consultation.
📚 Explore more of our featured Hague Convention decisions here.