The husband, a wealthy Nigerian had supported further traditional families outside the UK. The wife appealed a stay on her divorce petition. The husband argued that her habitual residence did not support jurisdiction. Agreed expert evidence concluded that the marriage being recognised here the subsequent traditional marriages in Nigeria. The husband then shifted his ground to say that this marriage itself was only a customary marriage, and that the ceremony in church had been only a blessing. The judge had ordered a stay saying that a Nigerian order would be recognised here but not necessarily vice versa and that the facts and family history meant it would better be determined in Nigeria.
Held: The dispute boils down to competing beliefs as to the attractivemess to the parties of the respective jurisdictions in ancillary relief proceedings. In fact the husband had manipulated the application for a stay and the judge’s discretion had been wrongly exercised: ‘the grant of a stay works unfairness to the wife to a degree that is unacceptable.’ The stay was lifted.
Judges:
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss DBE President of the Family Division Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Buxton
Citations:
[2002] EWCA Civ 949, [2003] Fam Law 12, [2002] 3 FCR 123, [2003] 1 FLR 192
Links:
Statutes:
Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973 5(6)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – de Dampierre v de Dampierre HL 1988
The existence and state of foreign proceedings are relevant to the exercise of the court’s discretion to stay an action on the ground of forum non conveniens. The essential test on which the court might exercise its discretion to stay the petition . .
Cited – Piglowska v Piglowski HL 24-Jun-1999
No Presumption of House for both Parties
When looking to the needs of parties in a divorce, there is no presumption that both parties are to be left able to purchase alternative homes. The order of sub-clauses in the Act implies nothing as to their relative importance. Courts should be . .
Cited – Butler v Butler CA 6-Mar-1997
In divorce proceedings, the issue of forum conveniens is decided by the balance of fairness including convenience. In the end the judge’s discretion is bounded by the statutory considerations which rest upon an evaluation of fairness to the parties . .
See Also – Otobo v Otobo CA 5-Jul-2001
Application to vacate a fixture . .
Cited by:
Cited – Radmacher v Granatino CA 2-Jul-2009
Husband and wife, neither English, had married in England. Beforehand they had signed a prenuptial agreement in Germany agreeing that neither should claim against the other on divorce. The wife appealed against an order to pay a lump sum to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Family
Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.175166