Divorce

Question 1

Relevant legislation?

Answer 1

In UK:
- Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973

In EU:
- Brussels II bis Regulation

Outwith EU/UK
- Family Law Act 1966

Question 2

L-K v K

Answer 2

• habitual residence does not consider length of time
• based on centre of interests
• where person is established

Question 3

Marinos v Marinos

Answer 3

• person cannot have habitual residence in more than one country
• Greece or England
• clear at time of proceedings, she was not habitually resident in Eng at time

Question 4

De Dampierre v De Dampierre

Answer 4

• divorce proceedings raised in France and NYC
• financial consequences of where action heard was not determinant
• husband applied for wife’s case to be stayed
• on balance of fairness, court should apply forum
• France was natural forum for dipsute
• proceedings should be stayed if other tribunal, competent jurisdiction, in which case may be tried more suitably for the interests of the parties and for the ends of justice

Question 5

Singh v Singh

Answer 5

• marraige entered under duress in India
• capacity governed by antenupital domicile of party: consent should be same law
• fact that marriage was celebrated in India did not affect jurisdiction
• Sco law applied
• mother’s threats serious nature: marriage annulled

Question 6

Quazi v Quazi

Answer 6

• talaq divorce
• on appeal held that other proceedings apply to any proceedings officially recognised by country
• talaq divorce was a valid divorce by other proceedings

Question 7

Chaudhary v Chaudhary

Answer 7

• talaq divorce
• Eng Court of Appeal held that mere declaration of divorce by husband did not amount to proceedings
• not relevant that divorce would have been recognised under Kashmir law

Question 8

Tahir v Tahir

Answer 8

• action raised in Sco to annul divorce obtained in Pakistan
• argued that it was done to frustrate procedure
• Held: not contrary to public policy
• motive for obtaining divorce generally irrelevant under this provision

Question 9

Kendall v Kendall

Answer 9

• divorce in Bolivia manifestly contrary to public policy in England
• deception of signing papers was power of attorney in divorce proceedings

Question 10

A v L

Answer 10

• despite injunction in England against Russia proceedings, husband continued divorce
• both courts competent
• Russian proceedings started first
• Held: Russia divorce could be recognised