Re KL (A Child) [2013] UKSC 75, [2013] All ER (D) 24 (Dec)
It was settled law that habitual residence was a question of fact which should not be glossed with legal concepts which would produce a different result from that which the factual inquiry would produce. The concept corresponded to the place which reflected some degree of integration by the child in a social and family environment. Further, it was clear that parental intent did play a part in establishing or changing the habitual residence of a child: not parental intent in relation to habitual residence as a legal concept, but parental intent in relation to the reasons for a child’s leaving one country and going to stay in another. That would have to be factored in, along with all the other relevant factors in deciding whether a move from one country to another had a sufficient degree of stability to amount to a change of habitual residence.
