Rogers-Headicar v Headicar

Rogers-Headicar v Headicar

The existence of jurisdiction under Council Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 is not determined by the state of the pleadings but by the court's independent inquiry; the judge was correct to allow amendment and limit the costs order to those thrown away.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Lisa Rogers-Headicar; Defendant/appellant: Hugo Simon Headicar
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2004
Procedural Posture
Divorce Petition Appeal / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Divorce Jurisdiction, Amendment of Pleadings, Council Regulation (ec) No 1347/2000 (brussels Ii), Costs Orders
Family Law Civil Procedure Jurisdiction Divorce Jurisdiction Amendment of Pleadings Council Regulation (ec) No 1347/2000 (brussels Ii) Costs Orders

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lisa Rogers-Headicar

Claimant/respondent

Hugo Simon Headicar

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Divorce Petition Appeal / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court's jurisdiction under Council Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 is determined by the pleadings
  2. 2 Whether the judge had discretion to allow amendment of the divorce petition to plead a new jurisdictional basis
  3. 3 Appropriateness of the costs order

Ratio Decidendi

The existence of jurisdiction under Council Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 is not determined by the state of the pleadings but by the court's independent inquiry; the judge was correct to allow amendment and limit the costs order to those thrown away.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed