AB v EM (Jurisdiction Foreign Custody Order), Re
M was habitually resident in England and Wales at the relevant dates; the English court has jurisdiction under the inherent jurisdiction based on habitual residence; England and Wales is the most appropriate forum; it is in M's best interests to be returned to England and Wales for welfare determination; the Lebanese custody order does not preclude this outcome.
- Parties
- Applicant: AB; Respondent: EM
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 12 March 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Family / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Application granted; summary return ordered.
- Legal Topics
- Habitual Residence, Jurisdiction, Forum Conveniens, Recognition of Foreign Orders, Child Welfare, Summary Return
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
AB
Applicant
EM
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Family / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Was M habitually resident in England and Wales at the relevant dates?
- 2 Does the English court have jurisdiction under Art 8 or Art 10 of BIIa or parens patriae?
- 3 Is England and Wales the most convenient forum?
Ratio Decidendi
M was habitually resident in England and Wales at the relevant dates; the English court has jurisdiction under the inherent jurisdiction based on habitual residence; England and Wales is the most appropriate forum; it is in M's best interests to be returned to England and Wales for welfare determination; the Lebanese custody order does not preclude this outcome.
Court Disposition
Application granted; summary return ordered.
Orders
- M to be returned from Egypt to England and Wales for welfare determination.
- Tipstaff to retain father's travel documents until M is returned.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment