header-logo header-logo

Family

20 September 2013
Issue: 7576 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Re A (children) (jurisdiction: return of child) [2013] UKSC 60, [2013] All ER (D) 66 (Sep)

Jurisdiction under Art 8 of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003 (Brussels II) depended upon where the child was habitually resident. An approach which held that presence was a necessary pre-cursor to residence and thus habitual residence was one which accorded most closely with the factual situation of the child. However, it could not be said that that was acte claire for the purpose of EU law. Article 14 of the Regulation applied where no court of a member state had jurisdiction under Arts 8 to 13. Where no other member state was involved, either the courts of England and Wales had jurisdiction under Art 8 or no court of a member state did so. In that case, the jurisdiction of England and Wales was determined by the laws of England and Wales.  

 

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll