Armitage v Attorney General. Gillig v Gillig
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 1906 |
| Date | 1906 |
| Court | Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
33 cases
-
MEC v JAC (Divorce: Recognition)
...not of itself give support to the court's jurisdiction to legislate. Cases mentioned in this report:- Armitage v. The Attorney General [1906] P. 135. Bank of Ireland v. Caffin [1971] I.R. 123. K.D. (otherwise C.) v. M.C. [1985] I.R. 697; [1987] I.L.R.M. 189. K.E.D. v. M.C. (Unreported, High......
-
Clancy v Min Social Welfare
...wife also by virtue of her dependent domicile) was domiciled in England when the petition was presented. In Attorney General v. Armitage 1906 p.135 the principle was accepted that jurisdiction in divorce was based on domicile, and that the English Courts originally recognised a decree only ......
-
M.H. v G.H.
...1 A.C. 33 and W. v. W. [1993] 2 I.R. 476 considered. Cases mentioned in this report:- Armitage v. Attorney General. Gillig v. Gillig[1906] P. 135. Bank of Ireland v. Caffin [1971] I.R. 123. M.E.C. v. J.A.C. (Divorce: Recognition) [2001] 2 I.R. 399. K.D. (otherwise C.) v. M.C. [1985] I.R. 69......
-
Indyka v Indyka
...those of the English courts. Faith in the dominance of the domicile principle was shown in the decision in Armitage v. Attorney-General [1906] P. 135 where it was held that a decree obtained elsewhere than in the country of the domicile of the parties would be recognised if it would be rec......
Request a trial to view additional results
10 books & journal articles
-
De Facto Cohabitation: the International Private Law Dimension
...or its legal consequences, are recognised as binding;7272Cf the “recognition by” rule utilised in Armitage v Attorney-General [1906] P 135. (d) the exercise of party autonomy by the parties: have they purported to enter into an agreement to regulate their relationship and its financial or p......
-
Divorce: Jurisdiction; Judgments; Foreign Divorces; Grounds for Divorce; Bars
...2020 ONSC 644, aff’d 2021 ONCA 748. Le Mesurier v Le Mesurier, [1895] AC 517; Kadri v Kadri, 2015 ONSC 321. Armitage v Attorney General, [1906] P 135. Travers v Holley, [1953] P 246 (Eng Chapter 7: Divorce: Jurisdiction; Judgments; Foreign Divorces; Grounds for Divorce; Bars • where the cir......
-
Divorce: Jurisdiction; Judgments; Foreign Divorces; Grounds for Divorce; Bars
...Al Sabki v Al Jajeh, 2019 ONSC 6394. Le Mesurier v Le Mesurier, [1895] AC 517; Kadri v Kadri, 2015 ONSC 321. Armitage v Attorney General, [1906] P 135. Travers v Holley, [1953] P 246 (Eng Robinson-Scott v Robinson-Scott, [1958] P 71. Indyka v Indyka, [1969] 1 AC 33 (HL); Mayfield v Mayfield......
-
Divorce: Jurisdiction; Judgments; Foreign Divorces; Grounds for Divorce; Bars
...v Lin , 2010 ABQB 420; Marzara v Marzara , 2011 BCSC 408. 89 Le Mesurier v Le Mesurier , [1895] AC 517. 90 Armitage v Attorney General , [1906] P 135. canadian family law 182 t where the foreign jurisdictional rule corresponds to the Canadian jurisdictional rule in divorce proceedings; 91 t......
Request a trial to view additional results