In Teijeiro Fernandez v. Yeager, 121 F.Supp.2d 1118 (W. D. Mich. 2000), the Spanish father, residing in Michigan, sought access to children and request a stay of step-parent adoption proceedings being brought in state court. The District Court held that the father's acquiescence in the mother's removal of the children from Spain precluded his claim that removal violated his custodial rights, and that the court did not have jurisdiction over claim that his access rights were being violated.

The orders entered by the Spanish court indicated that Petitioner acquiesced to an award of sole custody to Respondent. Over three years, the Spanish court reaffirmed the award of sole custody to Respondent and Petitioner's right of access to the children. The parties and the court acknowledged respondent's right to move with the children to the United States. Petitioner's conduct and representations establish that Petitioner had a right of access, not a right of custody. Following Respondent's departure from Spain with the children in July 1996, Petitioner did not take any action with respect to the children for almost three years. Petitioner complained that Respondent had failed to comply with Petitioner's right of access by denying him the ability to keep in touch with his children.

Bromley v. Bromley, 30 F.Supp.2d 857 (E.D.Pa.1998), held that the Court lacks jurisdiction to enforce rights of access under the Convention. This Court agreed with the Bromley court's conclusion that federal courts do not have jurisdiction to enforce rights of access under the Convention.

The court reasoned that because Article 21 is limited to filing an application with the Central Authorities with respect to access rights, it "does not provide the courts with independent authority to remedy such a situation." The court observed that "the silence of the Convention as to any remedy for access rights is in sharp contrast to Article 12 which clearly provides authority for judicial authorities to order the return of a child 'wrongfully' removed."