QS v RS – WLR Daily

Posted October 31st, 2016 in adoption, children, citizenship, domicile, foreign jurisdictions, news by sally

QS v RS [2016] EWHC 2470 (Fam)

‘The parents who were British citizens adopted a child in Nepal in 2008. Neither parent was habitually resident or domiciled in Nepal at the time of the adoption, both being domiciled in the United Kingdom. The family moved to Dubai and the child was granted British citizenship. Soon afterwards the marriage broke down leading to a troubled period of dispute between the parents. The father remained living in Dubai and the mother in due course resided in the United Kingdom. The child, aged 12, resided with the father in Dubai. The mother applied, inter alia, for the recognition of the child’s foreign adoption order at common law and for a declaration under section 57 of the Family Law Act 1986 that she was the adopted child of the parents for the purposes of section 67 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. The issue arose whether, in the light of the common law rule that an English court was not entitled to recognise a foreign adoption order unless the adopting parents were domiciled (or habitually resident) in the relevant country at the time of the adoption, there were any circumstances in which that rule did not apply or might not be applied such that a foreign adoption would be recognised in England notwithstanding that at the time of the adoption the adopters were not domiciled in that country.’

WLR Daily, 10th October 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk