Re B (A Child) (Habitual Residence: Inherent Jurisdiction)

This case involved a dispute over the habitual residence of a child, B, who was removed from England to Pakistan by her biological mother, the respondent. The appellant, who was a significant figure in B's life, sought orders for contact and shared residence, as well as for B to be made a ward of court and returned to England. The High Court and the Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's applications. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal. The main issue before the Supreme Court was whether B had lost her habitual residence in England when she was removed to Pakistan and, if so, whether the court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to order her return to England. The Supreme Court held that B had not lost her habitual residence in England on 13 February 2014, the date when the appellant's application was issued. The court found that the factors indicating B's continued habitual residence in England were stronger than those suggesting a loss of that residence. These factors included B's short time in Pakistan, lack of integration into Pakistani society, and ongoing emotional ties with the appellant and other family members in England. The Supreme Court also held that, even if B had lost her habitual residence in England, the court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to order her return to England in order to protect her welfare. The court found that the restrictions on the use of the inherent jurisdiction did not preclude its use in such circumstances.