header-logo header-logo

Presence v residence

13 January 2012 / Simon Blain
Issue: 7496 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Are we edging towards a single, universally applicable, “test” of habitual residence? Simon Blain reports

“Where does my client live?” That is one of those apparently simple questions that family lawyers face on a regular basis, which turn out to have far from simple answers.

Three recent cases bring some welcome clarity to this fascinating area of the law, although we are still some way from having a single, universally applicable, “test” of habitual residence. The test remains different, depending on whether or not one is dealing with a European case to which Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (Brussels II Revised) applies.

Relevant factors

On a referral from the Court of Appeal the European Court of Justice (ECJ) was asked to clarify the appropriate test for determining the habitual residence of a child for the purposes of Arts 8 and 10 of Brussels II Revised (Mercredi v Chaffe [2010] EU ECJ C – 497/10).

The mother was born on the French Indian Ocean island of Réunion and is French. The father is British.

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll