The court reaffirmed that habitual residence is based on a child's integration in the familial and social environment, not solely on parental intention.

S. U. B. Karalliyadde, J.

This Revision Application is against the Order dated 08.12.2022 (P1) of the learned Provincial High Court judge of Colombo in Application No. HC/SPL/20/2018. The Central Authority has preferred the said Application, the Secretary to the Ministry of Justice and Prison Reforms (the Petitioner-Respondent) in terms of Section 9 of the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Act , No. 10 of 2001 (the Act). The Petitioner-Respondent in the Application before the Provincial High Court of Colombo sought the return of the two children to Italy on the basis that the 2^nd Respondent- Petitioner to this Application (the Petitioner) abducted the children from their habitual residence in Italy. The Application before the Provincial High Court of Colombo has been instituted by the Petitioner-Respondent, pursuant to an application made by the appropriate authority in Italy on the request made by the father of the children who is the 1^st Respondent-Respondent to this Application (1^st Respondent). By the Order marked as P1, the learned Provincial High Court Judge of Colombo acting in terms of Section 10 of the Act ordered the return of the two children to Italy concluding that the Petitioner abducted the children from their habitual residence in Italy. The mother, the Petitioner filed this instant Application seeking a revision of the Order marked as P1.

The facts of the case in a nutshell are as follows; The Petitioner and the 1^st Respondent got married in the year 2009 and thereafter migrated to Italy in the year 2010. The first child who is a boy was born on 26.11.2011 and the second who is a girl on 24.02.2014 and both children were born in Lecco Italy. On 26.09.2014, the Petitioner and the 1^st Respondent along with the two children came to Sri Lanka to construct a house and later the 1^st Respondent returned to Italy for his employment. As a result of a breakdown of their marriage, on or around 09.06.2015, the Petitioner instituted divorce proceedings before the District Court of Mount Lavinia. Thereafter the Petitioner returned to Italy with the two children on the request of the 1^st Respondent to attend the citizenship awarding ceremony on 21.06.2015, and when the Petitioner attempted to return to Sri Lanka with the two children, she was stopped by the police at the airport, consequent to a complaint made by the 1^st Respondent, who alleged that the Petitioner is attempting to abduct the children. While the Petitioner remained in Italy, the 1^st Respondent attacked the Petitioner with a hammer, leading to hospitalising her. As a result, on 23.05.2016 the legal custody of the two children was given to the Municipality of residence in Lecco by a court order from the Juvenile Court of Milan, and physical custody was granted to the Petitioner with the right of access to the 1^st respondent under the supervision of the Institution., [Page 297 of the High Court brief] Thereafter on 01.01.2017, the Petitioner filed a request with the court in Verona for her to return to Sri Lanka with the children. However, the court rejected her request after considering the objections of the 1^st Respondent (1R2a). On 07.09.2017, the Juvenile Court of Venice granted the Petitioner permission to take the two children to Sri Lanka for a period of 10 days to attend her divorce case (1R5). Thereafter, on 22.09.2017, the Petitioner with her two children returned to Sri Lanka. However, as the Petitioner failed to return to Italy in violation of the said order marked as 1R5, on the request of the 1^st Respondent, the Italian authority requested the Petitioner-Respondent to return the children to Italy. Upon such request made by the appropriate authority in Italy, Petitioner-Respondent instituted the proceedings before the Provincial High Court of Colombo for the return of the two children acting under and in terms of Section 9 of the Act.

In terms of Section 10 of the Act, subject to the exceptions provided in Section 11 , the High Court can o