Key Facts
- •Applicant (V) and Respondent (W) entered into a French Pacte Civil de Solidarité (PACS) on January 7, 2022.
- •Applicant applied to the English Family Court for dissolution of the PACS, claiming domicile in England and Wales.
- •Respondent argued Applicant was domiciled in France and that French courts were the forum conveniens.
- •The PACS agreement stipulated a regime of undivided ownership of assets acquired jointly or separately after registration.
- •Applicant's domicile was the central jurisdictional issue, with significant financial implications depending on the chosen forum.
- •The Applicant's domicile of origin was England and Wales; the Respondent did not dispute this.
- •The Applicant asserted jurisdiction solely on the basis of his domicile.
- •The Respondent made a substantial open offer of settlement to the Applicant, regardless of the court's decision.
Legal Principles
Jurisdiction in civil partnership dissolution proceedings in England and Wales.
Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004), sections 215, 219, 221; Civil Partnership (Jurisdiction and Recognition of Judgments) Regulations 2005 (CP(JRJ)R 2005).
Domicile of origin and domicile of choice.
Re Fuld (no. 3) [1968] P 675; Henderson v Henderson [1967] P 77; Udny v Udny (1869) LR 1 Sc & Div. 441; Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Henwood [2008] EWCA Civ 577.
Forum conveniens.
Spiliada Maritime Corpn v Consulex Ltd [1987] 1 AC 460; De Dampierre v De Dampierre [1988] 1 AC 92.
Standard of proof for domicile.
Re Fuld (no. 3) [1968] P 675; Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Henwood [2008] EWCA Civ 577.
Outcomes
The court found it lacked jurisdiction to dissolve the PACS.
The Applicant was found to be domiciled in France, not England and Wales, at the time of the application. The court also considered, for the sake of completeness, that even if jurisdiction existed, France would be the more appropriate forum.
Even if jurisdiction existed, the court would have stayed the proceedings.
France was deemed the more convenient forum due to the parties' residence, assets, and family connections there. While the Applicant would lose the potential for financial relief under English law, this was not seen as rendering the French forum substantially unjust given the nature of PACS and the parties' choices.