AR v RN (Habitual Residence)

AR v RN (Habitual Residence) is a case where the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom considered whether two young children, born in France and living in Scotland with their mother, had retained their habitual residence in France. The father sought to return the children to France under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. The primary issue before the court was whether the children were habitually resident in France immediately before 20 November 2013, the date on which the mother initiated residence proceedings in Scotland. The court needed to determine if the children's stay in Scotland was of a sufficiently stable and integrated nature to constitute a change in their habitual residence from France to Scotland.

The Supreme Court found that the lower courts had erred in their approach to determining habitual residence. The Lord Ordinary had focused exclusively on whether there was a joint intention to permanently relocate to Scotland, ignoring other relevant factors such as the stability and integration of the children’s lives in Scotland. The Inner House, on the other hand, had rightly considered the necessary stability of residence but misconstrued the issue as one of duration rather than integration. The Supreme Court concluded that the children had indeed become habitually resident in Scotland due to the stability and integration of their lives there, despite the original intention for the stay to be temporary. As such, the children were not wrongfully retained in Scotland, and the appeal by the father was dismissed.