SH v MM & Anor

SH v MM & Anor

The removal of the child was wrongful as it breached a valid and effective Prohibited Steps Order, thus the English court retains jurisdiction under Brussels II Revised.

Parties
Applicant: SH; 1st Respondent: MM; 2nd Respondent: RM
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Family / Interlocutory Judgment on Jurisdiction and Procedural Orders
Outcome
Further hearing required; English court retains jurisdiction pending resolution of permission and DNA testing issues.
Legal Topics
Parental Responsibility, Prohibited Steps Order, Jurisdiction, Habitual Residence, Wrongful Removal, DNA Testing
Family Law International Child Law Parental Responsibility Prohibited Steps Order Jurisdiction Habitual Residence Wrongful Removal DNA Testing

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SH

Applicant

MM

1st Respondent

RM

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Interlocutory Judgment on Jurisdiction and Procedural Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the removal of the child from England to Italy was wrongful under the Prohibited Steps Order
  2. 2 Whether the Prohibited Steps Order conferred rights of custody for the purposes of Brussels II Revised
  3. 3 Whether the applicant required permission to apply for Children Act orders

Ratio Decidendi

The removal of the child was wrongful as it breached a valid and effective Prohibited Steps Order, thus the English court retains jurisdiction under Brussels II Revised.

Court Disposition

Further hearing required; English court retains jurisdiction pending resolution of permission and DNA testing issues.

Orders

  • Case to be re-listed before the judge in the last full week of term.
  • Permission to apply for Children Act orders to be determined.