View source for AB v XS (2021) EWCOP 57

{{Case
|Date=2021/10/29
|NCN=[2021] EWCOP 57
|ICLR=[2022] WLR(D) 26
|ICLR ID=2021004841
|Essex issue=117
|Essex page=26
|Other citations=[2022] COPLR 33, [2022] 4 WLR 13
|Court=Court of Protection
|Judges=Lieven
|Parties=AB, XS
|Sentence=Habitual residence and inherent jurisdiction
|Summary=The judge set out the three issues in the case as: (a) whether XS is habitually resident in England and therefore the Court of Protection retains jurisdiction; (b) whether the High Court can make an order for XS to return to the UK under the inherent jurisdiction; and (c) whether it is in XS's best interests to be brought back to the UK. It was decided that XS was habitually resident in Lebanon, so there was no power under the MCA to make a return order; that to make such order under the inherent jurisdiction would inappropriately cut across the statutory scheme for no principled reason; and that in any event it was in XS's best interests to remain in Lebanon.
|Subject=Best interests,Foreign protective measure cases
|News=Yes
|RSS pubdate=2021/11/02 08:57:13 PM
}}