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

RESIDENCE: RAB v MIB [2008] CSIH 52

Sep 29, 2018, 17:37 PM
Slug : rab-v-mib-2008-csih-52
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 9, 2008, 06:26 AM
Article ID : 88793

(Extra Division, Inner House, Court of Session; Lord Eassie, Lady Paton, Lord Mackay of Drumadoon; 9 September 2008)

The couple were habitually resident in Scotland with the child. Without the father's consent the mother took the child to London, where she obtained an ex parte residence order from the English court. The father challenged the order on the basis that the English court had no jurisdiction, but was unsuccessful. The father later began divorce proceedings in Scotland, raising issues concerning the child's residence and future contact arrangements; the mother succeeded in obtaining a stay of those issues from the Scottish court on the basis that Scotland was forum non conveniens.

The test for forum non-conveniens was not the practical convenience of witnesses, but whether the alternative forum contended for was one in which 'the case may be tried more suitably for the interests of all the parties and the ends of justice'. The jurisdiction of the local Scottish court was established as of right and, as the court of the dissolution of the marriage, it not only had primary jurisdiction in respect of the welfare of the child of the marriage, but also the duty to satisfy itself that the welfare arrangements were appropriate. That jurisdiction could be abdicated only in exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case.

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