The court was asked whether it had jurisdiction to hear applications with regard to a child removed from Scotland. The father lived in Scotland, and the mother and child in England. The child had been habitually resident in Scotland and removed to England without the father’s consent. The father sought transfer of the proceedings to Scotland.
Held: The county court had not had jurisdiction. However the child had lived for more than a year in England before the mother began proceedings. All the section did was to deem a child to be resident in the country from which he had been taken for a period of one year. It was wrong to suggest that the proceedings once tainted with unlawfulness must continue to be so. The father’s appeal was rejected.
Otherwise In re B (Court’s Jurisdiction)
Lady Justice Arden DBE and Lord Justice Wall
[2004] EWCA Civ 681, Times 07-Jul-2004, [2004] 2 FLR 741
Bailii
Family Law Act 1996, Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Hadkinson v Hadkinson CA 1952
The courts adopt an approach similar to that of the United States courts where there has been a significant contempt on the part of a party to litigation. Denning LJ said: ‘Those cases seem to me to point the way to the modern rule. It is a strong . .
Cited – M v M (Abduction: England and Scotland) CA 1997
A couple went to live in Scotland with their children. The father was Scottish: the mother English. The mother left the family home and took the children to England without the father’s knowledge, and obtained an ex-parte residence order and a . .
Cited – Isaacs v Robertson PC 13-Jun-1984
(St Vincent and The Grenadines) Where the point at issue before the Board was as to a point of procedure with no direct comparable provision in UK law, the Board of the Privy Council should be reluctant to depart from the interpretation set down by . .
Cited – Johnson v Walton 1990
There was a continuing obligation to obey a court order until it was discharged. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Majera, Regina (on The Application of v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Oct-2021
The Court was asked whether the Government (or, indeed, anyone else) can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.197803