The limits of the Inherent Jurisdiction

The Court of Appeal addressed the perenially thorny problem of the limits of the Inherent Jurisdiction of the court with respect to children in Re N [2012] EWCA Civ 1086 , a decision of  McFarlane LJ, Thorpe LJ, Sullivan LJ on 11th July 2012. The issue was whether the High Court had jurisdiciton over a British child who was neither habitually resident nor present in England (and where there was no prorogation of jurisdiction). Without ruling out the possibility completely McFarlane LJ(with whom Thorpe and SUllivan LJJ agreed) cast considerable doubt on the jurisdiction and expressed the view that if it did exist it was only in the most extreme cases.

"It seems to me that if the jurisdiction exists in the manner described by Hogg J then it exists in cases which are at the very extreme end of the spectrum. Hogg J spoke of very dire circumstances justifying what Thorpe LJ in Al Habtoor was rightly concerned should be a very careful exercise of the jurisdiction if it is to be exercised at all. In Re B the dire circumstances referred to were the circumstances of the 15-year--old young person concerned, who had thrown herself on the mercy of the British authorities and the British authorities had sought orders from the High Court to assist their ability to protect her."