C (A Child)

C (A Child)

The English court has jurisdiction to hear M's application for maintenance under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989, as she was habitually resident in England on the relevant date. The Maintenance Regulation does not permit the application of 'reflexive effect' to proceedings in non-EU states such as Monaco, nor...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: M; Respondent: F
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Schedule 1 Children Act 1989 Application (maintenance) / Preliminary Issue on Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application for stay or dismissal refused; English court has jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction Under Maintenance Regulation, Habitual Residence, Lis Pendens, Reflexive Effect of EU Regulations, Forum Non Conveniens, Parental Responsibility, Child Maintenance
Family Law Private International Law Jurisdiction Under Maintenance Regulation Habitual Residence Lis Pendens Reflexive Effect of EU Regulations Forum Non Conveniens Parental Responsibility +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Applicant

F

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Schedule 1 Children Act 1989 Application (maintenance) / Preliminary Issue on Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the English court have jurisdiction to hear the mother's application for maintenance under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989?
  2. 2 Does the Maintenance Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009) have 'reflexive effect' in relation to proceedings first issued in Monaco, a non-EU state?
  3. 3 Who is the 'maintenance creditor' for the purposes of the Regulation: the parent or the child?

Ratio Decidendi

The English court has jurisdiction to hear M's application for maintenance under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989, as she was habitually resident in England on the relevant date. The Maintenance Regulation does not permit the application of 'reflexive effect' to proceedings in non-EU states such as Monaco, nor does it allow the court to stay proceedings on forum non conveniens grounds. The maintenance creditor is the parent applicant, and the evidence established that both M and her child had acquired habitual residence in England by 26 November 2019.

Court Disposition

Application for stay or dismissal refused; English court has jurisdiction.

Orders

  • The English court has jurisdiction to hear M's application for maintenance.
  • F's application for a stay or dismissal of the English proceedings is refused.