Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

JURISDICTION/WARDSHIP: H v H (Jurisdiction to Grant Wardship) [2011] EWCA Civ 796

Sep 29, 2018, 17:47 PM
Slug : 2011EWCACiv796
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 4, 2011, 12:17 PM
Article ID : 95439

(Court of Appeal; Thorpe and Black LJJ and Sir Henry Brooke; 8 July 2011)

The father was a British citizen of Afghan origin and the mother was Afghani. The mother and father married in Afghanistan, mother first came to Britain after the birth of her child who remained in Afghanistan in the care of the uncle.  After a few years the mother left the father alleging domestic violence. Shortly afterwards the child was allegedly ‘abducted' from the uncle's home and the whereabouts was not known to the court. The mother claimed the father was concealing the whereabouts of the child. The mother issued wardship proceeding. The judge clearly believed the father was concealing the whereabouts of the child and ordered him to bring the child into jurisdiction. The father challenged the jurisdiction of the court even though he claimed that he wanted the child to live in England if he could be found. The judge considered that the child was habitually resident in England, given his parents' habitual residence, and that the court therefore had jurisdiction. Orders were made against the father with penal notices attached.

Appeal allowed. No jurisdiction over the child who was never habitually resident in jurisdiction or present. Wardship discharged.

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