header-logo header-logo

24 January 2014
Issue: 7591 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Family law

Re LC (Children) [2014] UKSC 1, [2014] All ER (D) 62 (Jan)

The courts might, in making a determination of habitual residence in relation to an adolescent child who had resided in a place under the care of one of her parents, have regard to her own state of mind during her period of residence there in relation to the nature and quality of that residence. It was settled law that the courts were required to search for some integration on the part of the child in a social and family environment in the suggested state of habitual residence. Where a child of any age went lawfully to reside with a parent in a state in which that parent was habitually resident, it would no doubt be highly unusual for that child not to acquire habitual residence there too. The same might be said of a situation in which, perhaps after living with a member of the wider family, a child went to reside there with both parents. However, in highly unusual cases there had to be

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