M appealed against refusal of an order dismissing her application for the return of her daughter. The main issue related to T’s habitual residence and a claim that the jurisdiction of the court in England and Wales could be founded upon T being habitually resident in England and Wales on the occasion of her removal from this jurisdiction by her father to Lebanon.
Held: The facts did not require the High Court to assume a jurisdiction over the child.
McFarlane LJ commented that ‘If the jurisdiction exists in the manner described by Hogg J then it exists in cases which are at the very extreme end of the spectrum’
Judges:
Thorpe, Sullivan, McFarlane LJJ
Citations:
[2013] 1 FLR 457, [2012] Fam Law 1312, [2012] EWCA Civ 1086
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening) SC 9-Sep-2013
Acquisition of Habitual Residence
Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day.
Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children
Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463710