R (A Child)

R (A Child)

Jurisdiction lies with the English courts as the child has been habitually resident in England for more than three months following her arrival under the Portuguese consent order; the mother's application for a stay was without merit, and the consent order should be enforced with specified variations.

Parties
Appellant: Mother; Respondent: Father
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Child Custody, Jurisdiction, Contact Orders, Habitual Residence

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mother

Appellant

Father

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Which court has jurisdiction over child contact arrangements under Brussels II Revised Regulation?
  2. 2 Whether the mother was justified in withholding contact pending undertakings from the father

Ratio Decidendi

Jurisdiction lies with the English courts as the child has been habitually resident in England for more than three months following her arrival under the Portuguese consent order; the mother's application for a stay was without merit, and the consent order should be enforced with specified variations.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of 7 February 2007 varied as specified: first four paragraphs and paragraphs 6-9 struck out; recitals and undertakings remain; contact for 2007 as per schedule; contact for 2008 and subsequent years as per Portuguese order; applications to vary contact to be made to this court.
  • Application for stay refused.