Case Update (11 Aug 2025): Bassat v. Dana, 11th Circuit reverses and remands a District Court’s finding of no grave risk

The District Court judge, in this Hague Abduction Convention case, found no grave risk of harm, and no agreement for the children to remain in Florida indefinitely. The trial court also found that the younger child was not mature, and exercised its discretion to return both children, not separating them. See the District Court opinion here. The Respondent Mother appealed. On appeal, she argued that returning the children to Israel would expose them to a grave risk of harm, and that both children were mature and objected to the return. The Respondent, on appeal, focused on the grave risk emanating from intimate partner violence. She did not make the argument that there was a grave risk due to the ongoing conflict in Israel. At trial, the Petitioner Father “generally denied being violent” towards the Mother and children “in any way”. At trial, the Mother testified to incidents that had occurred in the past but also testified that she had left the children in the Father’s care while she traveled and that she feared for the girls safety more generally in Israel, and feared more for her own safety from the Father.

In finding that the District Court clearly erred, the 11th Circuit concluded that the court erred when it found that neither the Mother nor children testified about physical harm or threats, concluding that both the Mother and one child had referenced hitting when they testified. The 11th Circuit also found that there was “lots of other testimony” that would indicate that the Father “engaged in a series of other harmful actions that endangered the girls’ lives” and that he “repeatedly inflicted violence” against others around the Mother and children. Perhaps more importantly, the 11th Circuit found that the District Court never made a determination as to whether it found all of these statements about harm credible, but instead found that the witnesses’ testimony was “persuasive” instead.

In finding that the grave risk exception is applicable here, the 11th Circuit did not analyze the mature child exception. It reversed and remanded to the District Court, having concluded that returning the children would expose them to a grave risk based on intimate partner violence.