F had obtained an order in Romania for the custody of D. F obtained orders initially for the registration and enforcement of that order, but the High Court reversed that saying that neither the child nor his mother had been given adeuate opportunity to take part in the proceedings in Romania. F’s appeal to the Court of appeal having been rejected, he now sought to appeal to the Supreme Court who heard as a preliminary issue M’s argument that it did not have jurisdition to hear such an appeal.
Held: The Court did not have jurisdiction to hear te Appeal. Its general jurisdiction under section 40 of the 2005 Act was subject to any other provision. In this case Regulation 2201/2003 provided that there could be only one appeal at law, and that appeal had been to the Court of Appeal. The leave to appeal was struck out.
The position under BIIR is clear. There is a largely formal first stage when a judgment is declared enforceable; there is to be a first ‘appeal’ when the enforceability decision can be contested; and the decision on that appeal can only be contested by the notified proceedings. The UK’s notification expressly limits the ‘proceedings’ to ‘a single further appeal on a point of law’ which must be made, in England and Wales, to the Court of Appeal.
Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Hughes
 UKSC 34,  3 WLR 145,  Fam Law 967,  3 FCR 1,  2 FLR 379,  AC 1117,  WLR(D) 340,  4 All ER 95, UKSC 2016/0048
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary
Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, Constitutional Reform Act 2005 30 40, Brussels II Regulation
England and Wales
At first instance – MD v AA and Another FD 31-Jul-2014
M appealed against English orders recognising and registering a decision of the Bucharest Court of Appeal ordered that the custody of D who had lived with his mother in England since the age of eight weeks, should be transferred to his father in . .
Appeal from – D (A Child) (International Recognition) CA 27-Jan-2016
M and F disputed the return of their child D to Romania. F had obtained there an order for custody, and now appealed from refusal of the court here to recognise that order and enforce it. The judge had found that the proceedings in Romania had . .
Cited – Re S (A Child) (Foreign Contact Order) CA 16-Jun-2009
The registration of an order under BIIR is ‘essentially administrative, although it requires a judicial act’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children, International, Constitutional
Updated: 18 January 2022; Ref: scu.565829