LSdC (A Child) , Re [2012] EWHC 983 (Fam) (24 April 2012)

LSdC (A Child) , Re [2012] EWHC 983 (Fam) (24 April 2012)

The Portuguese order was an agreement on parental responsibility, not rights of access, so Article 21 procedure applied. Recognition and enforcement were refused because, in the specific circumstances, it would be manifestly contrary to public policy under Article 23(a) of Brussels II Revised, given the mother's mental/emotional state and lack of effective participation at the time of the agreement. The English court had jurisdiction to entertain the mother's application under Article 13.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 983 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant/father: AC; Respondent/mother: JS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Application for Registration, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment (family Law) / High Court (family Division) Judgment
Outcome
Application for recognition and enforcement of the Portuguese order dismissed; stay on English proceedings lifted.
Legal Topics
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments, Parental Responsibility, Jurisdiction Under Brussels II Revised, Habitual Residence, Public Policy Exception
Family Law Private International Law Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Parental Responsibility Jurisdiction Under Brussels II Revised Habitual Residence Public Policy Exception

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AC

Applicant/father

JS

Respondent/mother

Procedural Posture

Application for Registration, Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment (family Law) / High Court (family Division) Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Portuguese court order should be recognised and enforced in England under Council Regulation (EC) 2201/2003 (Brussels II Revised)
  2. 2 Whether the correct procedure is under Article 41 (rights of access) or Article 21 (parental responsibility)
  3. 3 Whether recognition would be manifestly contrary to public policy under Article 23(a)

Ratio Decidendi

The Portuguese order was an agreement on parental responsibility, not rights of access, so Article 21 procedure applied. Recognition and enforcement were refused because, in the specific circumstances, it would be manifestly contrary to public policy under Article 23(a) of Brussels II Revised, given the mother's mental/emotional state and lack of effective participation at the time of the agreement. The English court had jurisdiction to entertain the mother's application under Article 13.

Court Disposition

Application for recognition and enforcement of the Portuguese order dismissed; stay on English proceedings lifted.

Orders

  • Father's application under Article 41 dismissed.
  • Recognition and enforcement of the Portuguese order refused under Article 23(a).