header-logo header-logo

New signposts?

15 November 2013 / Clare Renton
Issue: 7584 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail
web_renton

What does the future hold for habitual residence, asks Clare Renton

The concept of habitual residence underpins jurisdiction in much English family law. It is critical in many if not most cases involving divorce, maintenance and children. Without habitual residence in England on the critical date, the court may be obliged to wash its hands of the matter. The reported cases repeatedly emphasise that habitual residence is a question of fact. That being so, one might wonder why the issue spawns so many cases at a high judicial level. There are decisions in the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on interpretation in the EU context, more under the Hague Abduction Convention 1980, others under domestic legislation. In particular the habitual residence of dependent children is been fraught with uncertainty.

In September 2013 the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the case of Re A (Children) [2013] UKSC 60, [2013] 3 WLR 761, to family practitioners agog with expectation. The lead judgments were given by Baroness Hale and Lord Hughes. The facts of the case

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll