header-logo header-logo

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

Family

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

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

From global fraud cases to fishing off-grid, Mishcon de Reya’s chair of dispute resolution Hugo Plowman discusses mentors, management switching off

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law announces partner promotion and new hires amid a record year for enquiries

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis wills and probate team extends reach with two appointments

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll