Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
View all articles
Authors

FAMILY PROCEEDINGS/ JURISDICTION: Re W (Children) [2011] EWCA Civ 703

Sep 29, 2018, 17:45 PM
Slug : 2011EWCA703
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jul 20, 2011, 10:08 AM
Article ID : 95335

(Court of Appeal; Thorpe, Rimer and Stanley Burnton LJJ; 17 June 2011)

A mirror order was made in respect of a child who was habitually resident in Malaysia. At issue was whether the jurisdiction thereby conferred on English court to make other orders relating to the child, who was a British citizen. The child was living with the British father under a Malaysian court order with unspecified ‘reasonable' contact to the mother.

A litigant seeking a mirror order does not accept the jurisdiction of the ancillary state to do any more than reiterate the provisions of the primary jurisdiction. The mirror order does not give rise to primary or shared jurisdiction to exercise discretionary powers in relation to residence or contact.

 

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from