Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez, 572 U.S. 1 (2014)
Lozano v. Montoya Alvarez is a leading U.S.
Is the one-year period in Article 12 of the Hague Convention—after which a court may refuse to return a child who is "now settled" in the new environment—subject to equitable tolling based on the abducting parent's concealment, and does ICARA authorize federal courts to apply such tolling?
Article 12 of the Hague Convention does not establish a statute of limitations on filing return petitions; rather, it prescribes that if a petition is commenced within one year of wrongful removal or retention, return is ordinarily mandatory, and if commenced after one year, return may be refused if the child is "now settled." Because the one-year period is not a limitations period, it is not subject to equitable tolling. ICARA does not authorize courts to toll the Convention's one-year period or otherwise displace the Convention's text. Courts may, however, consider facts such as concealment when assessing whether a child is "now settled," and under Article 18 retain discretion to order return even when a defense applies.
No. The Supreme Court held that the Convention's one-year period in Article 12 is not subject to equitable tolling and that neither ICARA nor federal common-law doctrines authorize courts to toll that period. The judgment denying return on the basis that the child was "now settled" was affirmed.
Lozano is a cornerstone case in international family law and treaty interpretation. It teaches that U.S. courts must adhere to treaty text and structure rather than superimpose domestic equitable doctrines. For Hague Convention practice, the case clarifies that (1) the one-year period in Article 12 is not a limitations bar and cannot be tolled; (2) timing runs from the date of wrongful removal or retention, not discovery; and (3) concealment can be considered in evaluating whether a child is "now settled" and in the court's discretionary decision whether to order return. For law students, Lozano exemplifies textualism in treaty interpretation, the importance of international uniformity, and the careful balancing of child-protective policies against deterrence of abduction.