PIL instrument(s)
Brussels IIa
Case number and/or case name
ET v TZ [2013] EWHC 2621 (Fam)
Details of the court
England and Wales, First Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels IIa
Article 20
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Article 23
Paragraph a
Paragraph b
Article 28
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Article 29
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Article 37
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b
Article 38
Paragraph 1
Article 39
Article 60
Paragraph d
Date of the judgement
06 August 2013
Appeal history
None
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
On 6th June 2013, an application for a declaration of enforcement of a Polish order was made. The parties to the proceedings were both Polish nationals. The interim residence order was granted by the Polish courts. On 6th August 2013, the order was enforced by the English courts. In this context, Mr Justice Roderic Wood held: “30 I do not find the recognition and enforcement of the interim residence order of the 30th September to be in the category identified in the speaking phrase of Mrs. Justice Macur (referred to above) and would therefore make the necessary declaration of enforcement. Whilst there may be some difficulties in enforcement they do not individually, nor collectively, cross the very high hurdle set by the regulation and the authorities referred to above. I am reinforced in that view by the information that not only have both parties continued to litigate these issues in Poland over the years, they each also have lawyers ready to bring any necessary applications before those Courts. For example, any application arising from the consequences of enforcement including, but not limited to, application by the father for permission to permanently relocate “B” back to England, and/or to determine contact issues, for it would be naïve of me to assume that for the foreseeable future this mother and father will be able to agree on such issues between themselves.” [30]

This website is written and maintained by the University of Aberdeen's Research Applications and Data Management Team