Key Facts
- •Two sets of divorce proceedings exist: one in Kaitha, India (initiated by the husband, SK, on April 26, 2022), and one in England and Wales (initiated by the wife, RR, on December 12, 2022, reissued April 28, 2023).
- •Both parties are originally from India, but SK has lived in the UK for a time, and RR came to the UK on a spousal visa.
- •The parties' marriage took place in India on March 11, 2019.
- •Both parties make serious allegations of abuse against each other.
- •RR alleges abuse and being forced to live with SK's same-sex partner, fearing retribution if she returns to India.
- •SK denies allegations and claims RR's motives were ulterior.
- •SK initially contested the English court's jurisdiction but later argued for a stay of proceedings, favoring the Indian courts.
- •RR argues for continuation of proceedings in England and Wales, citing factors like residence, limited financial resources, and safety concerns in India.
Legal Principles
Forum conveniens - determining which jurisdiction is most appropriate for hearing a case.
Schedule 1 of the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973, paragraphs 8 and 9.
Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Consulex Ltd principles for granting a stay on forum non conveniens grounds.
Spiliada Maritime Corporation v Consulex Ltd [1987] AC 460; further clarified in subsequent cases.
The court considers the 'balance of fairness' between parties in determining forum conveniens (per Butler v. Butler [1997] 2 FLR 311).
Butler v. Butler [1997] 2 FLR 311
The court undertakes a summary assessment of connecting factors, such as accessibility of courts and witnesses, language, costs, residence, and location of wrongful acts (Vedanta Resources PLC v Lungowe [2019] UKSC 20).
Vedanta Resources PLC v Lungowe [2019] UKSC 20; Altimo Holdings and Investment Ltd v Kyrgyz Mobile Tel Ltd [2012] 1 WLR 1804.
Outcomes
SK's application for a stay of proceedings in England and Wales was dismissed.
The court found that the balance of fairness favored continuing proceedings in England and Wales, considering factors such as the parties' residence, access to justice for RR, and the location of the alleged conduct.
SK was ordered to withdraw proceedings in India.
This was a direct consequence of the court's decision to dismiss the stay application, ensuring that only one set of proceedings would continue.