The Brussels II Regulation The jurisdiction of courts. The Brussels II Regulation – Jurisdiction in matters of divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment (matrimonial matters). The Regulation generally grounds the jurisdiction on these circumstances: Habitual residence Nationality
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
The Brussels II RegulationThe jurisdiction of courts
The regulation does not use the term „domicile“ as a general criterion, but in comparison with the Brussels I Regulation grounds the jurisdiction on „habitual residence“.
The term „habitual residence“ shall be interpreted autonomously , it can be understood as „permanent and usual centre of interests of a person chosen by the person with the intention to live there permanently.“
The last two possibilities – „a fight against“ the so-called forum shopping.
b) Of the nationality of both spouses or, in the case of the United Kingdom and Ireland, of the „domicile“ of both spouses.
The given rules how to determine the jurisdiction may be used alternatively.
Article 7 of the Regulation – so-called Residual jurisdiction – in case no court of Member state had jurisdiction pursuant all the previously given rules, the jurisdiction shall be determined in each Member state by its own national law.
The Brussels II Regulation
Recognition and enforcement of judgments
The reasons for declination of the recognition of judgments in matrimonial matters:
The reasons for declination in the matters of parental responsibility:
1)Enforceability of certain judgments concerning the rights of access and
2)Enforceability of certain judgments which require the return of the child
(a) where the judgment was given in default, the person defaulting was served with the document which instituted the proceedings or with an equivalent document in sufficient time and in such a way as to enable that person to arrange for his or her defense, or, the person has been served with the document but not in compliance with these conditions, it is nevertheless established that he or she accepted the decision unequivocally;
(b) all parties concerned were given an opportunity to be heard;
(c) the child was given an opportunity to be heard, unless a hearing was considered inappropriate having regard to his or her age or degree of maturity.
(a) the child was given an opportunity to be heard, unless a hearing was considered inappropriate having regard to his or her age or degree of maturity;
(b) the parties were given an opportunity to be heard; and
(c) the court has taken into account in issuing its judgment the reasons for and evidence underlying the order issued pursuant to Article 13 of the 1980 Hague Convention.