D (A Child : Jurisdiction : Habitual Residence)

D (A Child : Jurisdiction : Habitual Residence)

The child, D, remained habitually resident in France as of 22nd April 2016 because the evidence showed that his and his mother's stay in England was temporary, their primary social and family integration remained in France, and the factors suggesting disengagement from France were outweighed by those indicating continued habitual residence there.

Parties
Father: FP; Mother: TR
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Children Act 1989 Application / Preliminary Issue on Jurisdiction
Outcome
Father's applications dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence, Jurisdiction of Courts, Child Arrangements, Parental Responsibility
Family Law Private International Law Habitual Residence Jurisdiction of Courts Child Arrangements Parental Responsibility

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FP

Father

TR

Mother

Procedural Posture

Children Act 1989 Application / Preliminary Issue on Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court had jurisdiction to adjudicate on the father's applications under the Children Act 1989 based on the child's habitual residence as at 22nd April 2016

Ratio Decidendi

The child, D, remained habitually resident in France as of 22nd April 2016 because the evidence showed that his and his mother's stay in England was temporary, their primary social and family integration remained in France, and the factors suggesting disengagement from France were outweighed by those indicating continued habitual residence there.

Court Disposition

Father's applications dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Father's applications under the Children Act 1989 are dismissed.