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
Practical aspects to assessing competence in children
Rebecca Stevens, Partner, Royds Withy KingThis is an article regarding the practical aspects to assessing competence in children. The article explores a range of practicalities, such as meeting a...
Scrumping the crop of recent pension decisions
Rhys Taylor, 36 Family and 30 Park PlaceJonathan Galbraith, Mathieson Consulting2020 has thus far proved to be a memorable year for all the wrong reasons, but nonetheless it remains an interesting one...
Conduct in financial remedies – when is it now a relevant consideration?
Rachel Gillman, 1 GC/Family LawThis article provides an overview of all aspects of financial misconduct following the recent decision of Mostyn J in OG v AG [2020] EWFC 52, wherein all aspects of...
The treatment of RSUs/Stock Options in light of XW v XH
Peter Mitchell QC, 29 Bedford RowStock Options and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) are frequently encountered by the Family Court when dividing property on divorce or dissolution of a Civil Partnership....
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
View all articles
Authors

BRUSSELS II REVISED: GB v RNB [2013] EWHC 414 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:01 PM
Slug : brussels-ii-revised-gb-v-rnb-2013-ewhc-414-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 15, 2013, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 101831

(Family Division, Peter Jackson J, 27 February 2013)

The Romanian family lived in the UK and when the parents separated the father was granted interim residence of the child by the Romanian courts until proceedings had concluded.

The mother claimed to have never been served with documents in relation to the Romanian proceedings and resisted registration in the English court of the Romanian order.

The judge found that the combination of documents and information provided by the father strongly suggested that the mother was well aware of proceedings in the Romanian courts and that she had every opportunity to present her case there. The court, therefore, had no basis upon which to refuse recognition of the judgment and the mother's appeal against registration was refused.

The mother was appealing the decision of the Romanian court and, therefore, it was appropriate for the court to place a stay on registration pending the outcome of that appeal.

 

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