- Jurisdiction in children proceedings based on a connection with matrimonial proceedings (Re A (jurisdiction—Family Law Act 1986) (application for amplification)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- In connection with?
- Appropriate forum
- Application for amplification
Family analysis: This case concerned an application made by a father dated 30 September 2021 for an order that a child, A, should live with him and their sibling, J, in country B. A lived with their mother in country C, and both countries were in the Middle East. Neither child was considered habitually resident in England and Wales and all parties were permanently living abroad. The judgment considers whether an application under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) arises ‘in connection with’ matrimonial proceedings (section 2(1)(b)(i) of the Family Law Act 1986 (FLA 1986) which are continuing (FLA 1986, ss 2A(1)(a)(ii) and 42(2)) such that the court would have jurisdiction to make ChA 1989, s 8 orders. The judgment helpfully sets out the legal arguments which have been advanced in previous cases, before concluding that the court did not have jurisdiction. Although the primary issue was the court’s jurisdiction when habitual residence is in issue, the judgment’s consideration of the father’s ‘amplification’ application following draft judgment, and the warning that followed, is especially helpful. Laura Flanagan, assistant solicitor at the International Family Law Group LLP, analyses the decision.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial