Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
High Court to hear application to vary and enforce child custody arrangements despite initial remit to District Court
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court determined that it retained jurisdiction to hear an application regarding custody and access arrangements for a child, despite a previous agreement by the parents that future variations would be dealt with in the District Court. The applicant alleged breaches of the initial compromise order, which followed child abduction proceedings, and sought both enforcement and variation of those arrangements. The judge reasoned that the court never formally remitted the proceedings to the District Court, the operative order allowed for jurisdiction to be exercised by the High Court, and that it was appropriate in the interests of justice and child welfare for the High Court to proceed. The court therefore refused to decline jurisdiction, fixed the matter for hearing, but noted that future applications might more appropriately be brought in the District Court.
child custody – enforcement of court orders – variation of child arrangements – child abduction proceedings – compromise agreement – jurisdiction – High Court – District Court – remittal of proceedings – Guardianship of Infants Act 1964 – Child Abduction and Enforcement of Custody Orders Act 1991 – inherent jurisdiction – best interests of the child – access arrangements – Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) – Article 42A of the Constitution
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
