AN vs NO

This case concerned a jurisdictional dispute in divorce proceedings between AN and NO, involving issues of domicile and forum conveniens.

TLDR:

• AN filed for divorce in England and Wales.
• NO contested the jurisdiction and filed for divorce in a European Country.
• The court had to determine if England and Wales had jurisdiction and if it was the appropriate forum.
• The court ruled in favor of NO, dismissing AN's petition in England.

AN (the wife) and NO (the husband) were involved in a jurisdictional dispute over their divorce proceedings. AN filed for divorce in England and Wales on 7 December 2023, while NO filed for divorce in a European Country on 29 December 2023. NO contested the jurisdiction of the English courts, leading to a series of legal proceedings to determine the appropriate forum.

The court examined the relevant provisions of the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973, particularly focusing on the domicile and habitual residence of the parties. AN argued that she had acquired a domicile of choice in England and Wales, while NO contended that the family's connections were stronger with the European Country.

The court reviewed the detailed history of the parties' residences, their children's education, and their ties to both jurisdictions. It was noted that the family's presence in England was primarily for the children's education, while their main home and significant connections remained in the European Country.

AN's claim of having acquired a domicile of choice in England was scrutinized against established legal principles. The court found that AN's presence in England was transactional and time-limited, lacking the necessary permanence to establish a domicile of choice.

Furthermore, the court considered the balance of fairness and convenience, concluding that the European Country was the more appropriate forum for the divorce proceedings. The family's main home, the scale of assets, and the parties' business interests were all significantly tied to the European Country.

As a result, the court dismissed AN's petition filed in England and Wales and indicated that the proceedings should continue in the European Country. This decision provides important guidance on jurisdictional disputes in international divorce cases.

Legal representatives: Ms S Hillas KC & Mr S Charles (instructed by McAlister Family Law) for the Applicant Wife, Ms S Singer & Mr J McEvoy (instructed by Farrar & Co & Co) for the Respondent Husband.

Judicial Panel: Sir Jonathan Cohen

Case Citation Reference: [2024] EWFC 94