header-logo header-logo

03 March 2017
Issue: 7736 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

EU

W and another v X C-499/15, [2017] All ER (D) 180 (Feb)

The Court of Justice of the European Union gave a preliminary ruling deciding that Art 8 of Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 and Art 3 of Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 should be interpreted as meaning that, in a case such as that in the main proceedings, the courts of the member state which had made a decision that had become final concerning parental responsibility and maintenance obligations with regard to a minor child no longer had jurisdiction to decide on an application for variation of the provisions ordered in that decision, inasmuch as the habitual residence of the child was in another member state. It was the courts of the member state of habitual residence that had jurisdiction to decide on that application.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll