Summary
The court of first instance rejected the application for deprivation of parental authority. It stated that it had no jurisdiction under Brussels IIa Regulation because, at the time the court was seised, the child was habitually resident in the United Kingdom. The applicant appealed against this decision. She pointed out that Brussels IIa Regulation do not define the definition of the term ‘habitual residence’ so it should be interpreted in accordance with Polish provisions. According to Art. 25 of the Polish Civil Code, the domicile of a natural person is the place where that person stays with the intention of residing permanently. Given the above, the applicant stated that the Polish court had jurisdiction in this case, because she and her child did not have the intention to stay permanently in the United Kingdom. The court of second instance disagreed with the appellant finding that the term ‘habitual residence’ shall mean the place where the child exists. The court emphasised that, according to Art. 8 par. 1 of the Brussels IIa Regulation, ‘the intention of residing permanently’ is irrelevant.