Private international law concerning children in the UK after Brexit

comparing Hague Treaty law with EU Regulations

Paul Beaumont

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Private international law applicable to children in intra-EU cases in the UK under EU law (the Brussels IIa and Maintenance Regulations) is compared with the regime that would apply to such cases if the UK were to fall back on the international treaty regime governing the UK and the EU after Brexit. The treaty regime is found in the Hague Conference on Private International Law’s Conventions on Child Abduction (1980), Child Protection (1996) and Maintenance (2007). There is no ‘cliff-edge’ because the international regime is very sophisticated and can be regarded from a UK perspective as being at least as good as the EU regime. In particular the international regime has the merit of everyone in the UK having to master one fewer legal regime (because the international regime for non-UK/EU cases exists anyway). The international regime avoids the unsatisfactory EU ‘override’ mechanism in child abduction cases, the overly rigid approach to recognition and enforcement of maintenance and access orders coming from other EU States and the restrictive approach to declining or transferring jurisdiction in relation to third States. However, the EU regime creates greater legal certainty in UK/EU maintenance cases through lis pendens and broader party autonomy in parental responsibility and access cases.
Original languageEnglish
JournalChild and Family Law Quarterly
Volume29
Issue number3
Early online date23 Jun 2017
Publication statusPublished - 22 Sep 2017

Fingerprint

private law
international law
treaty
EU
international regime
regulation
Law
regime
abduction
international agreement
European Law
child protection
jurisdiction
autonomy
responsibility

Keywords

  • jurisdiction
  • recognition and enforcement of judgments
  • parental responsibility
  • access
  • child abduction
  • maintenance

Cite this

Private international law concerning children in the UK after Brexit : comparing Hague Treaty law with EU Regulations. / Beaumont, Paul.

In: Child and Family Law Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 3, 22.09.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{bbbaa140609846c78346774d48afbd5c,
title = "Private international law concerning children in the UK after Brexit: comparing Hague Treaty law with EU Regulations",
abstract = "Private international law applicable to children in intra-EU cases in the UK under EU law (the Brussels IIa and Maintenance Regulations) is compared with the regime that would apply to such cases if the UK were to fall back on the international treaty regime governing the UK and the EU after Brexit. The treaty regime is found in the Hague Conference on Private International Law’s Conventions on Child Abduction (1980), Child Protection (1996) and Maintenance (2007). There is no ‘cliff-edge’ because the international regime is very sophisticated and can be regarded from a UK perspective as being at least as good as the EU regime. In particular the international regime has the merit of everyone in the UK having to master one fewer legal regime (because the international regime for non-UK/EU cases exists anyway). The international regime avoids the unsatisfactory EU ‘override’ mechanism in child abduction cases, the overly rigid approach to recognition and enforcement of maintenance and access orders coming from other EU States and the restrictive approach to declining or transferring jurisdiction in relation to third States. However, the EU regime creates greater legal certainty in UK/EU maintenance cases through lis pendens and broader party autonomy in parental responsibility and access cases.",
keywords = "jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments, parental responsibility, access, child abduction, maintenance",
author = "Paul Beaumont",
note = "The author is grateful to Lara Walker and Katarina Trimmings for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of the article but remains solely responsible for its contents. The article grew out of a presentation at the CFLQ/Cambridge Family Law Centre Conference, ‘Brexit and Family Law’, Cambridge University, 27 March 2017.",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
day = "22",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
journal = "Child and Family Law Quarterly",
issn = "1358-8184",
publisher = "Jordan Publishing",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Private international law concerning children in the UK after Brexit

T2 - comparing Hague Treaty law with EU Regulations

AU - Beaumont, Paul

N1 - The author is grateful to Lara Walker and Katarina Trimmings for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of the article but remains solely responsible for its contents. The article grew out of a presentation at the CFLQ/Cambridge Family Law Centre Conference, ‘Brexit and Family Law’, Cambridge University, 27 March 2017.

PY - 2017/9/22

Y1 - 2017/9/22

N2 - Private international law applicable to children in intra-EU cases in the UK under EU law (the Brussels IIa and Maintenance Regulations) is compared with the regime that would apply to such cases if the UK were to fall back on the international treaty regime governing the UK and the EU after Brexit. The treaty regime is found in the Hague Conference on Private International Law’s Conventions on Child Abduction (1980), Child Protection (1996) and Maintenance (2007). There is no ‘cliff-edge’ because the international regime is very sophisticated and can be regarded from a UK perspective as being at least as good as the EU regime. In particular the international regime has the merit of everyone in the UK having to master one fewer legal regime (because the international regime for non-UK/EU cases exists anyway). The international regime avoids the unsatisfactory EU ‘override’ mechanism in child abduction cases, the overly rigid approach to recognition and enforcement of maintenance and access orders coming from other EU States and the restrictive approach to declining or transferring jurisdiction in relation to third States. However, the EU regime creates greater legal certainty in UK/EU maintenance cases through lis pendens and broader party autonomy in parental responsibility and access cases.

AB - Private international law applicable to children in intra-EU cases in the UK under EU law (the Brussels IIa and Maintenance Regulations) is compared with the regime that would apply to such cases if the UK were to fall back on the international treaty regime governing the UK and the EU after Brexit. The treaty regime is found in the Hague Conference on Private International Law’s Conventions on Child Abduction (1980), Child Protection (1996) and Maintenance (2007). There is no ‘cliff-edge’ because the international regime is very sophisticated and can be regarded from a UK perspective as being at least as good as the EU regime. In particular the international regime has the merit of everyone in the UK having to master one fewer legal regime (because the international regime for non-UK/EU cases exists anyway). The international regime avoids the unsatisfactory EU ‘override’ mechanism in child abduction cases, the overly rigid approach to recognition and enforcement of maintenance and access orders coming from other EU States and the restrictive approach to declining or transferring jurisdiction in relation to third States. However, the EU regime creates greater legal certainty in UK/EU maintenance cases through lis pendens and broader party autonomy in parental responsibility and access cases.

KW - jurisdiction

KW - recognition and enforcement of judgments

KW - parental responsibility

KW - access

KW - child abduction

KW - maintenance

UR - http://www.jordanpublishing.co.uk/practice-areas/family/publications/child-and-family-law-quarterly#.WVC_T2jyuM8

M3 - Article

VL - 29

JO - Child and Family Law Quarterly

JF - Child and Family Law Quarterly

SN - 1358-8184

IS - 3

ER -