- about us
- why choose us
- contact us
In Sekhrvi v Ray (2013) the husband and wife were married for 2 years and had a son together. During the marriage they relocated to Singapore but the marriage deteriorated. The parties separated and the wife (and child) moved to England where she issued divorce proceedings.
The wife, whose domicile of origin was Indian, claimed that while she and the husband were habitually resident in Singapore at the time she issued divorce proceedings, she claimed to have adopted an English domicile of choice. The husband submitted that in leaving England she had abandoned her domicile of choice and her domicile of origin reverted.
A number of factors indicated that the wife had not lost her domicile of choice:
1.Both she and the husband retained properties in England
2.She maintained her professional connections and subscriptions, including to a medical job vacancy service which reinforced her contention that she always planned to return to England to take up a consultancy position.
The Judge accepted the wife's position that the move to Singapore had been time limited and that she planned to resume her career and residence in England. The Judge also found that, despite his Indian ancestry, the husband had been born in England and considered himself to be domiciled here.
The Judge concluded that the wife could proceed with the divorce in England.
For further information and advice on this issue, and other family law issues, please contact us for a free initial consultation on 01992 306 616 or 0207 956 2740 or email us.Back to Law Articles