Finnish Supreme Court clarifies that children ‘in transit’ may have no habitual residence under Hague rules

On 24 February 2026 the European Association of Private International Law (EAPIL) published an analysis of a precedent-setting Finnish Supreme Court judgment (KKO 2025:102) involving a 21-month-old child moved from Australia to Finland as part of an intended family relocation to China. After the parents separated in Helsinki, the mother sought the child’s return to Australia under the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention. The Supreme Court held that the parents’ documented plan to leave Australia meant the child’s habitual residence there had already been relinquished. At the same time, Finland did not become the new habitual residence because the stay was brief and explicitly temporary. With no habitual residence anywhere, the Convention’s return mechanism could not be triggered.



For assignees who need to secure Finnish entry stamps or short-term residence permits during such interim stays, VisaHQ offers an easy-to-use portal (https://www.visahq.com/finland/) that walks applicants through every step, from required documentation to appointment booking, and keeps HR teams updated in real time—helping to prevent the paperwork gaps that can complicate custody or jurisdictional disputes.

For global-mobility and immigration professionals the ruling is significant on two fronts. First, Finnish courts will not accept a contractual “habitual-residence clause” in relocation agreements; objective facts prevail. Second, transferee families passing through Finland en route to a third country could find themselves outside the Hague regime if custody disputes arise in the transition period. Employers should therefore ensure that assignment policies cover jurisdiction, dispute resolution and emergency relocation assistance for dependants. The decision aligns Finland with Nordic case-law that treats parental agreements on shuttle custody or planned moves as insufficient to establish residence. Practically, HR departments coordinating multi-stage moves (for example, Australia–Finland–China) should advise assignees to obtain clear, temporary residence permits and document each family member’s travel timeline to minimise legal uncertainty.