The High Court declared that it had no jurisdiction in Irish family proceedings after a French court was found to have been seised of the parties’ divorce case first. Mr Justice O’Higgins delivered judgment on 3 June 2005.
The parties, identified in the judgment as Y.N.R. and M.N., are French citizens. They married in France in 1978 under a separate-property marriage settlement. They moved to County Cavan in 1998. The applicant returned to France permanently in 2002.
M.N. filed for divorce in Strasbourg on 22 November 2002. Y.N.R. began Irish family proceedings by special summons on 23 December 2002. She contested the French court’s jurisdiction, but that court ruled on 25 March 2003 that it had jurisdiction under Brussels II. The judgment says that ruling was not appealed. The French court later directed the divorce proceedings to continue and appointed an independent financial expert with the applicant’s consent.
In France, Y.N.R. counterclaimed for divorce and sought financial orders, including €100,000. In the High Court, M.N. sought a declaration that the Irish court lacked jurisdiction because the French court had the case first. Y.N.R. challenged the validity of the EU regulations in Ireland and argued, among other things, that the marriage’s main “seat” was in Ireland and that Irish courts should deal with property in the State.
The judge found that the applicant had established a factual basis to make her constitutional arguments, given the parties’ time living in Ireland. But he ruled that her participation in the French proceedings, including her counterclaim for divorce and financial relief, was inconsistent with arguing that the French divorce proceedings were impermissible. He therefore found her precluded from making the constitutional case and said it was unnecessary to decide its merits.
The judge nevertheless addressed the arguments in observations. He concluded that Brussels II applied in Ireland, that the respondent was entitled under the regulation to pursue divorce in France, and that the French court’s unappealed decision on when its proceedings began raised no issue requiring a reference to the European Court of Justice. He also said Irish courts had no role supervising the French courts’ handling of their proceedings.
The court declared under the cited EU regulations that it had no jurisdiction in the matter. The judgment does not determine the parties’ property rights or the outcome of the French divorce proceedings.