On December 11, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Lozano v. Alvarez, a case arising out of issues regarding “equitable tolling” under Article 12 of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction [3]. Article 12 of the Convention requires that an abducted child be returned if the other parent files a petition for the child’s return within one year of the abduction. Thus, Article 12 ensures that the abducting parent not benefit from the laws of the nation to which he or she has abducted the child. Should the left-behind parent fail to meet the one-year filing deadline, Article 12 provides that the court should still order the return of the child, “unless it is demonstrated that the child is now settled in its new environment.”

According to U.S. Supreme Court documents [4], the circuit courts are split over whether equitable tolling may apply to the one-year period filing deadline. Equitable tolling states that the statute of limitations will not preclude a claim if the plaintiff, despite reasonable care, did not discover some injury until after the limitation period has expired. The Fifth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits have held that the one-year period may be equitably tolled, while the Second Circuit has held that the one-year period is not subject to equitable tolling and that the settling defense is available even where the abducting parent conceals the child. The question presented is the following: whether a district court considering a petition under the Hague Convention for the return of an abducted child may equitably toll the running of the one-year filing period when the abducting parent has concealed the whereabouts of the child from the left-behind parent.

A decision is expected by the Supreme Court during the summer of 2014.