SJ v JJ & Anor [2012] EWHC 931 (Fam) (02 March 2012)

SJ v JJ & Anor [2012] EWHC 931 (Fam) (02 March 2012)

The English court, having retained jurisdiction under Article 10 of Brussels II Revised due to the wrongful retention of A in Poland, should now make a final residence order in favour of the mother, as she has demonstrated commitment to facilitating contact and further delay would be contrary to A's welfare. The court's jurisdiction ceases upon making this 'judgment on custody', and future contact issues should be resolved in Poland.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 931 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant: Applicant; 1st Respondent (by His Children's Guardian, Robert Mc Gavin): JJ; Children's Guardian: Robert McGavin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Family Law Parental Responsibility / Child Abduction / Final Hearing on Residence and Contact Orders Following Prior Interim Orders and Cross Jurisdictional Proceedings
Outcome
Final residence order in favour of the mother; detailed contact order for father and paternal grandparents; English court's jurisdiction ceases upon this order.
Legal Topics
Residence Order, Contact Order, Brussels II Revised, Habitual Residence, Parental Responsibility, Children Act 1989, Cross Border Enforcement
Family Law International Child Abduction Jurisdiction Residence Order Contact Order Brussels II Revised Habitual Residence Parental Responsibility +2 more

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant

Applicant

JJ

1st Respondent (by His Children's Guardian, Robert Mc Gavin)

Robert McGavin

Children's Guardian

Procedural Posture

Family Law Parental Responsibility / Child Abduction / Final Hearing on Residence and Contact Orders Following Prior Interim Orders and Cross Jurisdictional Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the English court retains jurisdiction under Brussels II Revised to make orders regarding A's residence and contact
  2. 2 Whether a final residence order ('judgment on custody') should be made or further interim orders
  3. 3 What contact arrangements are in A's best interests given the cross-border context

Ratio Decidendi

The English court, having retained jurisdiction under Article 10 of Brussels II Revised due to the wrongful retention of A in Poland, should now make a final residence order in favour of the mother, as she has demonstrated commitment to facilitating contact and further delay would be contrary to A's welfare. The court's jurisdiction ceases upon making this 'judgment on custody', and future contact issues should be resolved in Poland.

Court Disposition

Final residence order in favour of the mother; detailed contact order for father and paternal grandparents; English court's jurisdiction ceases upon this order.

Orders

  • A to reside with his mother in Poland (final residence order)
  • Weekly visiting contact with paternal grandparents in Poland (10am-6pm) plus reasonable staying contact as agreed