Notable and Reported Cases

A list of Expatriate Law’s notable cases that deal with significant points of law and are considered to be valuable precedents.

1. M v F (Parental Responsibility of a non-biological father) [2024] EWFC 377 (B) (09 September 2024)
2. AR v BR (Re Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 and Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973) [2023] EWFC 76 (13 March 2023)
3. GC v AS (No. 2) [2022] EWHC 310 (Fam) (09 February 2022)
4. S (Children), Re (Inherent Jurisdiction: Setting Aside Return Order) [2021] EWCA Civ 1223 (13 August 2021)
5. KMM v NAM (Jurisdiction) [2021] EWHC 2300 (Fam) (13 August 2021) (concerning divorce jurisdiction)
6. XM v XF [2021] EWHC 1279 (Fam) (13 May 2021)  (child arrangement orders made by the English court concerning children residing in Dubai)
7. GC v AS [2021] EWHC 14 (Fam) (11 January 2021)
   A Court of Appeal decision concerning British children residing in Libya, allowing an appeal against a decision made by Mostyn J. The mother can now proceed with her application for the return of the children to England under the parens patriae jurisdiction. The mother’s previous solicitors had failed to raise parens patriae as the jurisdiction basis in their original application.
8. F v M [2020] EWHC 2676 (Fam) (20 July 2020) (concerning relocation of children from the UAE to England)
9. HRH Prince Louis of Luxembourg v HRH Princess Tessy of Luxembourg & anor [2017] EWHC 3095 High Court (Family Division), MacDonald J (Reporting Restrictions – Family Division – Administration of Justice – Article 10 – Article 8)
   High-profile royal divorce.
10. KAC v DJC [2013] EWHC 292 (Fam)
    Family Division, Mostyn J
    David Truex gave expert evidence on Australian visa laws in an abduction/relocation case.
11. Robson v Robson [2010] EWCA Civ 1171
    Big money ancillary relief appeal where husband had inherited substantial wealth and the parties had lived an extravagant lifestyle.
12. M v M [2004] EWHC 688 (Fam) (29 March 2004) 
    Financial Relief: Substantial Earning Capacity
13. Wermuth v Wermuth (No 2) [2003] 1 FLR 1029