Re KM (A Child) (Jurisdiction: Habitual Residence)

Re KM (A Child) (Jurisdiction: Habitual Residence)

KM's habitual residence at the time proceedings commenced was England, as her primary social and family environment was with DM, her psychological parent, and her intention was to remain in England to preserve her family life with him. The degree of integration and attachment to DM outweighed her historic connections to Country A.

Parties
Applicant: A Local Authority; 1st Respondent: A Mother; 2nd Respondent: A Father; 3rd Respondent: DM; 4th Respondent: KM (A Child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings / Jurisdiction Determination
Outcome
Jurisdiction affirmed; proceedings to continue in English court.
Legal Topics
Habitual Residence, Jurisdiction, Parental Responsibility, Modern Slavery, Family Life
Family Law Child Protection International Law Habitual Residence Jurisdiction Parental Responsibility Modern Slavery Family Life

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A Local Authority

Applicant

A Mother

1st Respondent

A Father

2nd Respondent

DM

3rd Respondent

KM (A Child)

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings / Jurisdiction Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court has jurisdiction over care proceedings for KM based on habitual residence
  2. 2 Determination of KM's habitual residence at the time proceedings commenced

Ratio Decidendi

KM's habitual residence at the time proceedings commenced was England, as her primary social and family environment was with DM, her psychological parent, and her intention was to remain in England to preserve her family life with him. The degree of integration and attachment to DM outweighed her historic connections to Country A.

Court Disposition

Jurisdiction affirmed; proceedings to continue in English court.

Orders

  • Court has jurisdiction to continue care proceedings for KM.
  • Parties invited to submit timetable for final welfare hearing.