Law 507 PDF

Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2008 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi)
Class : NINTH
Paper Code :LLB 507 & LLB 509
Subject : PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
UNIT 1
INTRODUCTION
The Conflict of Laws, or as it is more commonly known by the name of Private

International Law is that branch of law which deals with those case where some
foreign element is present; to be more precise the geographical factor is present.
This situation may arise when the parties are residents of a foreign country and any
dispute arises between them or there a dispute between people belonging to two
different countries. And in all the cases where any foreign element is present, the
Court applies the principle of “conflict of laws.’
In the present era, almost all countries have a system in place to deal with conflict
of laws. This system is required for the increased movement of people from one
territory to the other due to various reasons. The Courts in such cases voluntarily
apply the principle of conflict of laws. While there are some laws which are
accepted in most of the countries, some rules might differ depending on the place.
Private International Law determines that what law will be applied when there is a
dispute between the parties relating to their private rights and obligation, but where
&
School of Law
some foreign element is also present, and what Court shall have the jurisdiction to
try the dispute. According to this, Private International Laws may possess the
following principles.
It is a branch of national or local laws of the country.

The cases under the purview of Private International Laws always involve a
foreign element.
 The local Courts govern the cases.
 The law is administered over individuals.
 In simple words, Private International Laws can be defined as a means to
find out the way to solve a dispute when any foreign element is involved.
Basis of Private International Law

The basic principle behind applying Private International Law is to ensure that
justice is done. It will be a grave injustice to the parties if cases are decided using
local laws of the land, when a foreign element is involved, for instance, a Spanish
element is decided by Indian Court using the rule of law which is prevalent in India
just because it is an Indian Court. The final decision could have been different if a
Spanish Court had decided the matter
The function of conflict of laws is to indicate the area over which it has
jurisdiction. According to Savigny, Private International Law is a diversity of
&
School of Law
positive laws (with each territory having its laws) and thus it is essential to
mark each in a separate outline to fix the area of authority. According to him, it
was necessary to fix the limit of different positive laws against one another.In
respect to conflict of laws, it has also been suggested that it is a mutual conduct,
where each state adopts the rule of each other to meet the ends of justice.
The Indian Legislature also supports this suggestion. This is evident from reading
Section 11 of the Foreign Marriages Act, 1969. According to the provision, Indian
Consular Officers and Diplomats are allowed to solemnize the marriage of a
couple, when one of them is an Indian citizen who is in a foreign place. But such a
marriage cannot be solemnized if it is in contravention to the laws of the country
where it is to be solemnized. The prohibition clause is there because if it is done
so, it’ll be contrary to international law, and the mutual agreements which the
nations have between them.
General and Traditional Rules of Private International Laws

The general rule of Private International Law can be explained by giving the
following example. Suppose X and Y come into a contract of sale of clothes from
India. X is an Indian and Y is an Italian. Now a dispute arises between X and Y,
and the case comes before the Court. The Court will have to decide which
country’s law should be followed. In such cases, general rules of Private
International Law are followed.
Hereunder, given are some Traditional Rules of Private International Law:
&
School of Law
 The validity of marriage is determined by the law of the place where

marriage was solemnized.
 Succession of immovable property is governed by laws of the land where the
property is situated
 Proper law of contract decides the contractual liability between the parties
 Law of Procedure is governed by the law of the Forum
 In a case of liability under the law of torts, it is governed by the law of the
land where the damage occurred.
Important Issues Which Arise on Application of Private International Law
Whenever any foreign element is present in a case and Private International Law is
applied to solve the dispute two main issues arise. First, is the determination of the
Procedural Law and the second issue is to determine the Substantive Law.
Procedural Laws are those laws which govern the procedure of the court in civil,
criminal and administrative matters. The Procedural Law ensures that the due
process of the law is being followed.
Substantive law is that law which deals with the legal relationship between
different individuals of the state, or between individuals of the state and the state
itself. Hence, it can be said that Substantive laws explain the rights and duties of
the people, and Procedural Law lays down the procedure to enforce such rights and
&
School of Law
duties (or liabilities and obligations). The entire case depends on how these laws
are being applied.
The judicial pronouncement in the case of Re Annesley. can be cited here. The
facts of the cases are that a British National domiciled in Italy. This British
National had some moveable property in England. He died without a will and a
question arose regarding the succession of the property. When the case came to the
Court, the Court had to decide the matter of Procedural and Substantive Law to be
followed.
With respect to Procedural Law, the domestic law is followed. So the issue remains
limited to the question of Substantive Law, and choosing of Substantive Law
remains paramount to achieve the ends of justice.
Justice Cardozo, the distinguished American Judge, has opined that this conflict of
laws is one of the most baffling subjects of legal science. He also observed that
when confronted with the application of Private International Law, many Judges
find themselves lost
Unification of Private International Law

From a long time, it was believed that law of different countries could unite.
According to Ernst Zitelmann, since legal formalities are more or less common all
across the globe, and policy goals are share, laws of every country end up
converging at the end.
&
School of Law
As stated earlier, the need for Private International Laws arises because each
country has its different international law. If all the countries lay down uniform
internal laws, then there would be no need of Private International Laws. But, it
must be noted that the difference is not only regarding the internal laws but also
differences are there in Private International Laws which each nation chooses to
follow, on account of which conflicts between law arises. Due to this, the
unification of law is vital.
There are two modes of unification of laws, namely:
 Unification of Internal laws of different countries.
 Unification of rules of Private International Law.
Unification of Internal Laws: The first attempt to unify the internal laws of
different nations was attempted through the Bern Convention in 1886 under which
an International Union was formed to protect the interests of authors and writers
over their literary works. Then after World War I, the Institute for Unification of
Private Laws was established. The Institute achieved some success in the
unification of civil laws of different States. The Warsaw Convention of 1929 (later
amended by the Hague Convention of 1955) is a landmark in this regard as it laid
down uniform laws which regulated the carriage of goods and person by air. The
unification is not very poor, but looking at the bigger picture, it is very
insignificant. An attempt was also made to unify the laws of the Soviet Union and
the People’s Democracies of Eastern Europe.
&
School of Law
But this method of unification has not been successful in the long run because
every nation differs from the other with respect to culture, religion, the upbringing
of the people, public policy, etc.
&
School of Law
UNIT 2
FAMILY LAW MATTERS
MATERIAL AND FORMAL VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE
CHOICE OF LAW AND JURISDICTION OF COURTS
Conflict of laws in the matrimonial field has been a phenomenon in India

since time immemorial, dating back to conflicts between the laws of Shia
and Sunni sects in the Muslim community. In the period preceding 1857,
ecclesiastical courts enjoyed jurisdiction over matrimonial causes in India.
As the jurisdiction of these ecclesiastical courts extended to all Christians,
problems related to conflict of laws did not arise. It could be enjoyed by the
courts so long as the parties were resident within their jurisdictional
territory. In turn, this also meant that the domicile or nationality of the
parties was not a cause of concern for the church.
However, the rapid advances of the English society in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries made the recognition of divorce essential. This came in
the form of Matrimonial Causes Act, which not only repudiated notions of
indissolubility in marriage, but also transferred the jurisdiction to the civil
courts of the country in entirety.
&
School of Law
Subsequently, the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1925 defined

matrimonial causes to include nullity of marriage, divorce, judicial
separation, and restitution of conjugal rights. These causes were introduced
in India by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for all citizens except Muslims.
Among Muslims, wives are allowed to seek divorce on the grounds specified
under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939. The essay examines
the first two of these grounds viz. nullity of marriage and divorce in
extensive detail.
DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE
In England, the consent and breakdown theories of divorce are both partially
accepted. However, the Matrimonial Causes Act, 1973 accepts no other
ground for divorce except irretrievable breakdown of marriage. The
situations where such a breakdown would ensue are statutorily defined by
Section 1 (2), and include factors such as the commission of adultery,
desertion or separation for a continuous period immediately before the suit.
In India in contrast, the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 stands as a testament to

colonial times, whereas the Special Marriage Act, 1954 shows the
insensitivity of putting guilt as a ground for divorce alongside mutual
&
School of Law
consent and breakdown. The former recognizes few grounds such as

adultery and conversion by the husband.
It is the latter statute, however, which calls for our attention: it re-enacts
each of the three theories of divorce in Sections 27 and 28. Many fault
grounds are recognized, including lengthy imprisonment, incurable insanity,
leprosy, presumption of death, over and above traditional fault grounds such
as adultery and cruelty. This broad outlook is reiterated by the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955.
JURISDICTION IN ENGLISH LAW

Several fundamental changes have been effected by the Domicile and
Matrimonial Proceedings Act, 1973, following which the jurisdiction of
English courts has been limited to two grounds- domicile and habitual
residence. According to the statute, the first of these grounds is satisfied if
either party is domiciled in the country on the date of initiation of
proceedings. Moreover, a subsequent change in domicile would not alter the
jurisdiction already enjoyed by the English courts. The second ground of
habitual residence has been recognized in light of the Hague Conventions
regarding the same. At the same time, the term has not been defined, but left
to be determined by factual elements instead. This idea has been underlined
by the Council of Europe on Fundamental Legal Concepts thus: “in
determining whether a residence is habitual, account Is to be taken of the
&
School of Law
duration and the continuity of the residence as well as other factors of a

personal or professional nature which point to durable ties between a
person and his residence.”
JURISDICTION IN INDIAN LAW

The matrimonial laws in India vary from one community to another, yet
statutory enactments have been made for most of these. Under none of these
religion-specific laws is either nationality or domicile considered relevant
for the purpose of determining jurisdiction in a matrimonial cause. Instead,
they choose to accord centrality to ‘residence’, which in turn has been
defined in a broad sense. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, serves as a case in
point: it recognizes, among others, ‘residence’ at the time of marriage and
presentation of petition as valid factors for determination of jurisdiction.
Courts have been quick to point out that whether a spouse is resident in a
particular place or not depends upon the facts of the case. This mixed
question of law and fact was handled by the Supreme Court in Jagir Kaur v.
Jaswant Singh thus, “…we would define the word ‘resides’ thus: a person
resides in a place if he through choice makes it his abode permanently or
even temporarily; whether a person has chosen to make a particular place
his abode depends upon the facts of each case. Additionally, Subba Rao, J.
observed that the word ‘residence’ would not include “a casual stay in, or a
flying visit to, a particular place”.
&
School of Law
However, it is possible that the parties may have failed to establish a

matrimonial home during the period of marriage. In such cases, jurisdiction
is accorded to the last place of residence, even when the duration of such
stay is remarkably brief. Tara v. Jaipal Singh serves as a useful illustration:
in this case, the parties had not set up permanent residence anywhere,
choosing to live at several places for short time periods instead. It was held
that they were living in Darjeeling simply because it was where they had
resided during the week immediately preceding the breakdown.
CHOICE OF LAW IN ENGLAND AND INDIA
English courts invariably apply their own domestic law once their
jurisdiction has been determined. This is not negated even when it becomes
known that matrimonial misconduct does not constitute a ground for divorce
in the foreign country of residence/domicile. While this may find
justification in the grounding of English divorce law in domicile, it cannot
explain away the insistence of the English courts to apply their domestic law
while assuming jurisdiction on the basis of residence of the parties. Special
statutory jurisdiction has come to be abolished over time, but English
domestic law is still applied in all the cases where the English court has
jurisdiction.
In India, once questions of jurisdiction have been entertained and

determined, the courts apply the personal law of the parties involved. Thus,
&
School of Law
the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 would be applied in a case where
the parties to the dispute belong to the Parsi community. The Special
Marriage Act, 1954 is applied even when both parties belong to the same
religion, in situations where the marriage involves a foreign element, or has
been performed abroad. It becomes evident, then, that the question is not of
applying the lex domicilii of the parties, but their lex fori.
RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN DIVORCES

[A] England
The recognition of foreign divorces in India has come to be codified by the

Recognition of Divorces and Legal Separations Act, 1971. Prior to the
enactment of this statute, it had been held that a foreign divorce decree
would not be recognized unless the judicial pronouncement was made by a
competent court in the country of domicile. In Le Mesurier v. Le Mesurier,
the court had observed that: “The principle of recognizing the validity of a
decree pronounced by the court of the domicile has been long established
and forms an essential part of the comity of nations.”Even when such a
pronouncement was not made, but only recognized as valid by the foreign
court of domicile, the English courts would recognize the divorce. This
position changed with Travers v. Holley, which laid down that the validity of
the basis of exercising jurisdiction before the foreign court, whether
domicile or otherwise, would determine recognition of the divorce. This was
&
School of Law
taken even further by the judgment of the House of Lords in Indyka v.

Indyka , which qualified real and substantial connection between the parties
and the court as a valid ground for seeking divorce before that particular
forum.
Following the enactment of the Act of 1971, recognition of foreign divorces

is guided by Sections 3 and 6 of the statute. The latter of these provisions
has been reconstituted with the passing of the Domicile and Matrimonial
Proceedings Act, 1973, which permits the wife to have her separate
domicile. The Act of 1971 identifies two new grounds for divorce viz.
habitual residence and nationality, and is arguably a step forward in the
sense that it retains liberality while injecting fresh certainty.‘Habitual
residence – a whittled down version of domicile – offers an alternative to the
concept of domicile, which has developed in a largely erratic manner. ’At
the same time, the absence of a clear-cut definition for “habitual residence”,
under either statute or case-law, may deprive the law of the requisite clarity.
When any of these grounds contained in sections 3 and 6 exist, the foreign
divorce is recognized regardless of whether it has been obtained through
judicial proceedings or otherwise However, at times when this is not the
case, it becomes necessary to construe the term “other proceedings” for non-
judicial divorces. This issue came to consideration before the House of
Lords in Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte
&
School of Law
Ghulam Fatima, where a wholesome reading of the provisions of the statute

led the court to conclude that a single set of proceedings had to be
necessarily instituted in the country where the divorce was obtained.
In 1899, Lindley, M.R. had observed that English courts only needed to look
at the finality of the judgment and jurisdiction of the court before
recognizing a foreign divorce, provided that English notions of substantial
justice were not offended. This viewpoint is reflected in the Act of 1971,
which permits refusal on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice
and public policy.
[B] India
Each matrimonial law specifies grounds for dissolution of marriage.

However, none of these legislations, whether inadvertently or otherwise,
state whether a domiciliary/residence qualification is necessitated by a
divorce. Consequently, it becomes necessary to look at courts for guidance,
and the judgment in Satya v. Teja Singh clarifies the need for a domicile in
the location of the court for upholding the validity of the divorce.
Thus, Indian rules for recognition of foreign divorce are not fully developed
yet apart from general provisions contained in Section 13 of the Civil
Procedure Code. Accordingly, the development of case-law assumes
&
School of Law
centrality. In Joao Gloria Pires v. Ana Pires, the court started with the
assumption that the decree was valid, but could not be accepted because it
was contrary to public policy. In a later case, recognition was denied on the
ground that one of the spouses had misrepresented their domicile before the
foreign court
Indian courts must assume responsibility in developing the law in this regard
with or without the aid of legislation. When they themselves can assume
jurisdiction on the basis of residence, there can be no logical explanation to
refuse it to foreign courts on the same count. In fact, the Law Commission
made several important recommendations for addressing this issue in its
65th report, such as provisions of fairness for the other party (whether
because of the lack of reasonable notice, opportunity of hearing, et al.) and
the irrelevance of non-recognition by a third country as a factor in
recognizing a foreign divorce (or otherwise), but no subsequent law has been
passed.
NULLITY OF MARRIAGE
Both void and voidable marriages developed in ecclesiastical courts, but

were carried over to common law even after these courts ceased. The earliest
matrimonial statutes viz. the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 and the
Divorce Act, 1869, made no distinction between void and voidable
&
School of Law
marriages. However, it was adopted by both the Special Marriage Act, 1954
and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. With the enactment of the new
jurisdictional rules under the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act,
1973, the distinction has lost much of its significance in England.
The Act of 1973 has made radical changes to the jurisdiction of the court in
matters of nullity of marriage. The differences between the jurisdictional
rules for void and voidable marriages have been removed. Now, under the
statute, an English court can enjoy jurisdiction either under domicile, of one
or both parties, or through habitual residence for a period of one year before
the petition. In turn, they recognize a foreign nullity decree when it is
approved by the court of domicile or habitual residence. In Von Lorang v.
Administrator of Austrian Property, for instance, the House of Lords noted
that the court of common domicile of the parties to the dispute has the
competence to make a determination regarding questions of status of the
parties with finality. As Sir Jocelyn Simon, P. succinctly observed, “If we
ourselves claim a ground of jurisdiction we must concede a similar ground
of jurisdiction to foreign courts.
While Indian case laws on this specific issue have been rare, we can
conclude that the recognition of foreign nullity decrees will be no different
from recognition of divorce decrees. This is because Indian law makes no
&
School of Law
distinction whatsoever between matrimonial causes on the point of

jurisdiction.
LANDMARK CASE-LAW
[1] Rajiv Tayal v. Union of India
In this case, the NRI husband sought to quash the order of the court to join
the proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate in India largely on the
ground that subjecting him to criminal process would constitute an unfair
burden on him as he was residing in a foreign country. The court
unequivocally held that the acceptance of a plea of this nature would accord
a premium to an accused citizen simply because he happened to be abroad,
thereby placing him in a position superior to other Indians. By its rejection,
in contrast, it could be ensured that the process of law was not misused by
the accused.
[2] Narasimha Rao v. Venkata Laxmi
In this case, the decree for dissolution of marriage had been passed by a
circuit court in America. The meaning of each of the clauses in Section 13 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was set out by the Supreme Court.
‘Competent court’, as contained in the first clause, was understood to mean a
&
School of Law
court to whose jurisdiction the parties had both voluntarily and

unconditionally submitted themselves to. ‘Merits’, found in the second
clause, were construed as the grounds available under the law under which
the marriage took place.
CONCLUSION
After explaining each of the four clauses contained in Section 13, the
Supreme Court laid down a golden rule that has been relied upon extensively
in subsequent cases. According to this rule, the jurisdiction of the foreign
court as well as the grounds for relief must be in accordance with the
matrimonial law. At the same time, reasonable exceptions have been carved
out, bringing in the benefit of certainty and predictability of law. This
rescues the institution of marriage from the uncertain maze of Private
International Law rules of different countries in matters of jurisdiction and
merits grounded diversely in domicile, nationality, proper law, etc.
At the same time, we must realize that the Supreme Court has had few
opportunities to decide cases on conflict of laws on this issue have been few
and far between. Courts must not lose track of the fact that the contract for
origin of marriage is fundamentally different from a mercantile contract for
the reason that it affects both the parties concerned as well as the society to
which they belong.
&
School of Law
UNIT 3
ADOPTION
RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN ADOPTION
ADOPTION BY FOREIGN PARENTS
JURISDICTION UNDER INDIAN AND ENGLISH LAW
Origins of Inter- Country Adoptions
“Every child has a right to love and be loved and to grow up in an atmosphere of
love and affection and of moral and material security and this is possible only if the
child is brought up in a family. The most congenial environment would, of course,
be that of the family of his biological parents. But if for any reason it is not
possible for the biological parents or other near relative to look after the child or
the child is abandoned and it is either not possible to trace the parents or the
parents are not willing to take care of the child, the next best alternative would be
to find adoptive parents for the child so that the child can grow up under the loving
care and attention of the adoptive parents.”
The practice of inter-country adoption came about largely as a humane response to
the plight of war orphans and the abandoned children of servicemen in World War
II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War.
&
School of Law
Today, the main receiving countries are the United States, Canada and the
developed countries of Western Europe. Factors such as the decline in fertility
associated with stalling marriage, the limited success rate and high cost of
infertility treatment and a lack of domestic adoption opportunities have made inter-
country adoption an alternative to childless couples in the receiving countries.
However, in states of origin or sending countries, extreme poverty, lack of
contraception and society’s attitudes to birth of illegitimate children are three
major factors leading to the abandonment of children to institutions.[ii] The
concept of “male” child also leads to the abandonment of the girl child which is an
unfortunate reality in our own country.
International and regional legislative framework
At global level, it is of course the Convention on the Rights of the Child (the
“CRC”) that now constitutes the basic standard-setting text on adoption. Inter-
country adoption is specifically regulated by the ‘1993 Hague Convention on the
Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Inter-country Adoption’ (the
“HC”), which has now been ratified by about 90 States.
The approach of international legislators to adoption changed at the end of the
20th century as a result of serious concerns on adoption-related abuses that were
being increasingly expressed at that time.
&
School of Law
CRC Article 21 includes the obligation to “ensure that the child concerned in inter-
country adoption enjoys safeguards and standards equivalent to those existing in
the case of national adoption.”
The CRC places major emphasis on the importance and role of the parents and
family as the child’s primary caregivers, and requires, first and foremost, States to
assist them when they have difficulty in fulfilling their responsibilities
appropriately. Only when, despite such efforts, the child is “deprived of his or her
family environment”, or cannot be allowed to remain therein in light of his or her
best interests, does the obligation of the State to “ensure alternative care for the
child” becomes operative.[iv] And it is only when, in that case, the State is unable
to ensure that the child is “placed in a foster or an adoptive family” or is cared for
“in any suitable manner in the child’s country of origin” that inter-country
adoption “may be considered”.
The Committee on the Rights of the Child, which is the treaty body monitoring
compliance with the CRC, has expressed concerns over violations of inter-country
adoption standards in the case of many countries, and strongly recommends all
States involved in inter-country adoption that they ratify the Hague Convention as
one means of addressing the problems.
The Hague Convention sets out to do two main things, both unequivocally directed
towards protecting the child from illicit practices related to inter-country adoption,
&
School of Law
rather than to promoting the practice as such: 1. “to establish safeguards to ensure
that inter-country adoption takes place in the best interests of the child and with
respect for his or her fundamental rights as recognized in international law”; and 2.
“to establish a system of cooperation among Contracting States to ensure that those
safeguards are respected and thereby prevent the abduction, the sale of, or traffic in
children.” In many ways, it is therefore an implementing treaty for the CRC as
regards inter-country adoption. Thus, as a private law instrument, it puts in place
guarantees, procedures and mechanisms that facilitate States’ compliance with, in
particular, their obligations under the relevant CRC provisions.
The system of cooperation established by the HC revolves around a governmental

“Central Authority” in each country to oversee adoptions and to serve as focal
point on inter-country adoption issues with its counterparts in other States. The
treaty foresees that “adoption bodies”, or agencies, duly accredited by the Central
Authority in the receiving country can carry out a range of tasks related to the
adoption process, notably regarding assistance to adoptive parents before, during
and after the adoption takes place. If also specifically authorized by the Central
Authority in the country of origin, the adoption body can also provide such
assistance directly in that country.
The HC notably puts in place concrete application of the “subsidiarity principle”,

setting out procedures based on the fact that a child may be considered for inter-
country adoption only if “possibilities for placement of the child within the State of
&
School of Law
origin have been given due consideration.” Other particularly important elements
of the HC include: the requirement to determine the fitness of applicants to proceed
with an adoption; the implicit prohibition of non-regulated and private adoptions,
since all prospective adopters are to undertake the process through the Central
Authority or an accredited agency; prohibition of contact between prospective
adoptive parents and the child’s parents or other caregiver/s before the child has
been pronounced adoptable and valid consents have been obtained; commitment to
ensuring free and informed consent for adoption with no inducement of any kind;
and the automatic recognition of Hague-compliant adoptions by all States Parties.
The 1993 Convention asserts that authorities must ensure, taking into account the
age and degree of maturity of the child, that he or she has been counseled and
informed of the effects of the adoption and of his or her consent to the adoption,
where such consent is required; that consideration has been given to the child’s
wishes and opinions; that the child’s consent to the adoption has been given freely,
in the required legal form, and in writing; and that consent has not been induced by
payment or compensation of any kind (article 4(d)). Information on the child’s
origin, in particular the identity of the parents as well as the medical history,
should be preserved, but access by the child to that information is permitted only
insofar as it is allowed by the law of the State where it is held (article
30). Personal data gathered or transmitted under the 1993 Convention’s provisions
is to be used “only for the purposes for which they were gathered or transmitted,”
without prejudice to article 30 (article 31).
&
School of Law
Formal monitoring of the operation of the HC is entrusted to a “Special

Commission” which comprises of all Contracting States. It has so far met three
times, in 2000, 2005 and most recently in June 2010. The recommendations it
makes are advisory in nature.
There are various other regional instruments as well that protect and promote
children’s rights, particularly in matters of adoption, these are European
Convention on the Exercise of Children’s Rights (ECECR), European Convention
on the Adoption of Children 1967 and Inter-American Convention on Conflict of
Laws Concerning the Adoption of Minors 1984.
Adoptions from non-Hague countries
Despite the ever-growing number of countries that have ratified it, the majority of
inter-country adoptions still take place outside this framework.
Non-Hague countries whose adoption procedures continue to be subject to less

stringent conditions may well be more open to allowing growing numbers of their
children to be adopted abroad: for example, ICAs from Ethiopia continued to grow
substantially throughout the past decade, from a few hundred per year at the start to
over 4,000 in 2009.
Non-Hague countries therefore tend to be relatively attractive partners for inter-

country adoption. If this turns out to result in ever-increasing pressure on those
countries to institute or further develop inter-country adoption to “compensate” for
&
School of Law
reductions in Hague-compliant counterparts, rather than genuine instigation to

ratify the treaty, the true aims of adoption, including inter-country adoption, would
once again be severely compromised.
Adoption following disasters
The agreed policy of all major international agencies concerned is now that inter-
country adoption should not be envisaged during or in the immediate aftermath of
disaster situations, a position reflected by Guidelines adopted by the United
Nations in 2009. A 1994 recommendation related to the HC already established
that principle as regards the potential adoption of child refugees.[ix]The main
concern underlying this approach is that considerable time is needed to ascertain
whether children who may apparently be orphaned or abandoned have in fact
simply been separated involuntarily from their parents or other family members as
a result of the disaster.
The January 2010 earthquake in Haiti demonstrated the fragility of its application.
In addition to the fact that Haiti is not a party to the HC, and that its adoption
system was already known to be at unacceptable variance with international
standards, three major factors contributed to the problems encountered in this
specific case:
Adoption orders regarding hundreds of children had already been granted at the
time of the earthquake, but travel documents for these children had not been
&
School of Law
issued, and hundreds of other children were at some stage in the adoption process
or had simply been preliminarily and unofficially identified as adoptable;
Receiving countries took differing stances in relation to the status of the children
who they were prepared to evacuate and how this was to be done;
It was not only legally adopted children whose transfer abroad was expedited but
also many whose adoption was hurriedly “signed off” administratively, under
pressure, including some who had not even been matched with prospective
adopters.
Laws of Adoption in India
At the International level, India has ratified the Convention on the Rights of Child
and the Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoption of Children. The principal
law relating to adoption in India under the Hindu system is contained in the Hindu
Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA).
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 and The
Amendment Act, 2006 guarantees rights to an adopted child as recognized under
international obligations by all Hague member countries. The JJ Act, 2000,
however did not define ‘adoption’ and it is only by the amendment of 2006 that the
meaning thereof came to be expressed in the following terms:
“2(aa)-‘adoption’ means the process through which the adopted child is

permanently separated from his biological parents and become the legitimate child
&
School of Law
of his adoptive parents with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities that are
attached to the relationship”.
The amendment emphasized that adoption under this legislation would allow an
adopted child to become the “legitimate child of his adoptive parents, with the
rights, privileges and responsibilities attached to the relationship. This is a
significant move considering till then, adoption by non-Hindus was guided by the
Guardian and Wards Act, 1890. Minority castes such as Christians, Muslims or
Parsis did not recognize adoption hence the adoptive parents had to remain as
guardians to their adopted children as per the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890.
In exercise of the rule making power vested by Section 68 of the JJ Act, 2000, the
JJ Rules, 2007 were enacted, which now stand repealed by a fresh set of
Guidelines published by Notification dated 24.6.2011 of the Ministry of Women
and Child Development, Government of India under Section 41(3) of the JJ Act.
As a matter of fact, by virtue of the provisions of Rule 33(2) it is the Guidelines of
2011 notified under Section 41(3) of the JJ Act which will now govern all matters
pertaining to inter-country adoptions virtually conferring on the said Guidelines a
statutory flavour and sanction.
Rule 8(5) prescribes priorities for rehabilitation of a child and it is mentioned that
preference has to be given for placing a child in in-country adoption and the ratio
of in-country adoption to inter-country adoption shall be 80:20 of total adoptions
processed annually by a RIPA, excluding special needs children.
&
School of Law
Rule 8(6) mentions the order of priority which is to be followed in cases of inter-
country adoptions, which is as under:-
(i) Non Resident Indian (NRI) (ii) Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) (iii) Persons of
Indian Origin (PIO) (iv) Foreign Nationals
Rule 31 speaks about power of the State Government to constitute a Committee to

be known as the Adoption Recommendation Committee (ARC) to scrutinize and
issue a Recommendation Certificate for placement of a child in inter-country
adoption.
Concept of Inter-Country Adoption in India
The question regarding the validity of inter-country adoption was first debated in
the well-known case of In Re Rasiklal Chhaganlal Mehta whereby the Court held
that inter-country adoptions under Sec 9(4) of the Hindu Adoptions and
Maintenance Act, 1956 should be legally valid under the laws of both the
countries. The adoptive parents must fulfil the requirement of law of adoptions in
their country and must have the requisite permission to adopt from the appropriate
authority thereby ensuring that the child would not suffer in immigration and
obtaining nationality in the adoptive parents’ country.
The Supreme Court of India in a public interest litigation petition, Laxmi Kant
Pandey v. Union of India, had framed the guidelines governing inter-country
&
School of Law
adoptions for the benefit of the Government of India. A regulatory body, i.e.,
Central Adoption Resource Agency (for short ‘CARA’) was recommended and
accordingly set up by the Government of India in the year 1989.
Since then, the agency has been playing a pivotal role, laying down norms both
substantive and procedural, in the matter of inter as well as in country adoptions.
The said norms have received statutory recognition on being notified by the
Central Govt. under Rule 33 (2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Rules, 2007 and are today in force throughout the country, having also
been adopted and notified by several states under the Rules framed by the states in
exercise of the Rule making power under Section 68 of the JJ Act, 2000.
In the case of Mr. Craig Allen Coates v. State through Indian Council for Child
Welfare and Welfare Home for Children the Court held that where the adoptive
parents fail to establish clearly the motive for adopting a child from another
country, then the adoption process would be barred and be declared as mala fide
and that CARA should ensure more stricter guidelines in this regard.
One of the most significant issues in inter-country adoptions is finding prospective

adoptive parents, preferably of Indian origin. The Supreme Court of India, in
the Karnataka State Council for Child Welfare v. Society of Sisters of Charity St
Gerosa Convent, had held that the rationale behind finding Indian parents or
parents of Indian origin is to ensure the well-being of the children and that they
&
School of Law
grow up in Indian surroundings so that they can retain their culture and heritage.
The best interest of the children is the main and prime consideration.
Bombay High Court in a recent judgment, Varsha Sanjay Shinde & Anr. v. Society
of Friends of the Sassoon Hospital and others, held that once a child is approved
by an Oversees couple after the due procedure is followed, the same child cannot
be shown to other Indian parents and that such Indian Parents then cannot claim
any right or priority to get the child merely because they are Indian Parents and
preference should be given to them over Overseas Indians and Foreign Couples.
Although the main issues was decided the Court kept the petition pending in order
to see the compliance of directions given by the Court for giving the child to the
Overseas Indian Couple and to ensure that the Indian Parents (Petitioners) also get
a child expeditiously.
Court further laid down following guidelines for in-country and inter-country
adoptions to be read and applied in consonance with Guidelines of 2011:
(i) All the concerned Agencies viz RIPA, Specialized Adoption Agencies, SARA,
ARC, AFAA to scrupulously follow the Guidelines which have been laid down in
2011
(ii) Though there is no specific number mentioned in the Guidelines as to the

number of Indian parents to whom the child should be shown, within a period of
3/4 weeks, the child should be shown to as many Indian parents as possible and,
&
School of Law
secondly, at a time, the child should be shown only to one parent and not multiple
number of parents as has been done in the present case.
(iii) Only if the child is not accepted by Indian parents and the Adoption Agencies
on account of their experience come to conclusion that the child is not likely to be
taken in adoption by Indian parents then, in that case, it should be shown to foreign
parents.
(iv) When the child is shown to the foreign parents, it should be shown in the list
of priorities which are mentioned in the said Guidelines.
(vi) ARC and SARA should work not in conflict but in coordination with CARA, it
being the Centralized Nodal Agency.
Another latest judgment is that of Delhi High Court where the issue involved was
whether adoptions made directly by biological parents of a child without
intervention of CARA are valid in eyes of law. It was the argument of counsels of
petitioners that the intercession of CARA was mandated only in cases of those
children who are orphaned or abandoned by their biological parents. It was the
stand of CARA that the legislative mandate for the same is found in the
amendment made in 2006 to the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2000 by introducing Sub-Section (2) in Section 41 of the JJ Act. It is thus
contended that the rehabilitative measures for children in need of care and
protection through means of adoption applies, not only to orphaned and abandoned
children, but also to, surrendered children. In other words, according to the stand
&
School of Law
taken by CARA, the term “surrendered children” would include “children which
are given in adoption by their biological parents directly to the adoptive parents”.
Court said that even in absence of any guidelines court is not disempowered to
direct the State to carry out an investigation in the interest of child both in country
of origin and receiving country through a recognized agency. Court, however, left
the matter to the wisdom of a larger bench in order to answer the following
questions that came up in the petition:
(1) Whether the term “surrendered child” will include those children who are
directly taken in adoption from their biological parents without the intercession of
any specialized agency or child welfare committee?
(ii) Whether, in case of direct adoption, the 2011 Guidelines and the provisions of
Section 41(3) and (4) of the JJ Act are applicable?
(iii). If the answer to issue no.(i) and (ii) is in the affirmative, to what extent the
2011 Guidelines would apply to direct adoptions?
(iv) Can the court direct State to discharge its duty in its capacity as parens patriae
to carry out an investigation so as to safeguard the interest and/or rights of the child
conferred on him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India?
Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA)

&
School of Law
It is an Autonomous Body under the Ministry of Women and Child Development,

Government of India and is responsible for both in-country and inter-country
adoptions in India. The CARA Guidelines requires that every application from a
foreigner wishing to adopt a child must be sponsored by a social or child welfare
agency recognized or licensed by the government of the country in which the
foreigner is resident. The agency should be recognized by CARA.
The CARA guidelines depict in the beginning that it encourages in country

adoption rather than inter-country adoption and only where the child finds no
suitable home in the country, trans-national adoption would be considered.
The guidelines also provide that all Child Care Institutions (CCI) must be
registered under the provisions laid down under the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Amendment Act, 2006 as per Section-34 (3).The State
Government shall recognize suitable CCI’s as specialized adoption agencies under
Section 41(4) of the Juvenile Justice Amendment Act, 2006. The specialized
adoption agencies can turn into agencies for inter-country adoption only when they
have proper infrastructure for normal adoptable children as well as children with
special needs, and have quality child care services. In addition to these, they must
comply with all the requirements of CARA.
Who are adoptable for inter-country adoption?
As per CARA guidelines and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection)
Amendment Act 2006, only three types of children are recognized as adoptable.
&
School of Law
These include children who are orphans and are already under the care of some
specialized adoption agency, abandoned and those who are surrendered. In case of
an abandoned child below two years, such declaration shall be done within a
period of sixty days from the time the child is found. For an abandoned child above
two years of age, such a declaration shall be done within the period of four months.
In case of a surrendered child, two months reconsideration time shall be given to
the biological parent or parents after surrender before declaring the child legally
free for adoption.
Problems subsisting in inter-country adoptions
Child trafficking in the guise of transnational adoption
The biggest threat to the child in inter-country adoption is becoming a victim of

child trafficking racket. After the domestic procedure for adoption by the foreign
adopting parents is over, it becomes more a question of international law and
international treaties to look after the well being of the child. Moreover, the lack of
awareness regarding the legal procedures for inter-country adoption has given rise
to many fake adoption agencies. Children are sold abroad by providing false
information about them, falsifying documents, and making use of loopholes in the
adoption guidelines prescribed by the Supreme Court.
&
School of Law
Post adoption negligence
When the child is given for inter-country adoption, post adoption follow-ups
become increasingly difficult. Even though CARA guidelines outline the role of
the Indian diplomatic missions, foreign accredited agencies and professional social
workers in protecting a child from post adoption maltreatment, it has virtually not
helped anyone.
Post adoption domestic succession
Once the testator dies after bequeathing the property in the name of the child who
had been given in adoption, the identity of the child has to be proved. In cases
where there is a challenge to the succession by other survivors, the procedure
becomes even tougher. The country of residence will take the matter as per the
laws of domicile and if such succession becomes legally void due to any
unfortunate mistake, the adopted child would never be able to claim legal rights of
the property and thereby has to suffer great financial, physical and emotional
agony. Unfortunately India has not entered into any agreement or treaties to solve
such succession matters. The British law still rules the courts in such cases. Every
adopted child develops a strong inclination to know his/ her roots at some point of
time. Such legal turmoil over successions from the biological family may even
leave the adoptee in great frustration.
Post adoption identity crisis

&
School of Law
Juvenile Justice Care and Protection(Amended) Act), 2006 specifies that a child
can be adopted by any individual, irrespective of his/her marital status, by parents
who wish to adopt a child of same sex irrespective of the number of living
biological sons or daughters, or by couples who have no children of their own. It
has made adoption a simpler and universal law than the traditional laws. The law is
still tricky, however, in case of inter-country adoptions as prospective foreign
parents still have to first take the role of guardians and take the child to their
country. The process has to be finished there as neither the new law nor any
existing law specifically mentions a procedure in cases of overseas adoption. Once
the child becomes ready for overseas adoption, the international law needs to
recognize Indian adoption procedure and the child is adopted according to the laws
of the country of adoptive parents’ residence. The child becomes the ultimate
sufferer unless the “guardians” turn real parents as per the law of his new
residence.
Guidelines lack force of law
CARA guidelines most often lack the force of law. Hence the parties never really
remain obliged to follow the guidelines or even the Indian law in case the habitual
resident belongs to a country which is not a member or has relinquished its
membership from the convention. The guidelines fail to ensure the health, safety
and adjustment of the child after he/she has left India. It should be noted that as the
numbers of adoptions increase, the number of regulations followed are lesser. The
&
School of Law
guidelines should have put a maximum number of adoption procedures a month,

by each adoption agency so that social workers, the authorities, and voluntary
coordination committees would not be overburdened. Lack of regular checks at the
adoption agencies and the manner in which they operate can also lead to many
problems.
Since the CARA guidelines mention nothing about any penal actions against
unrecognized adoption agencies, child trafficking in the name of inter-country
adoption has gotten an easy way out.
Recommendations
 Inter-country adoption has to be dealt with great care as it often opens up

floodgates of child trafficking, child exploitation and sexual harassment
of children. The suggestions are.
 CARA guidelines should have two chapters separately dealing with in
country and inter-country adoptions.
 Penal offences must be included in case of any sort of failure by the agencies
to comply with the rules and regulations.
 Licensing procedure for the adoption agencies should be made stricter.
&
School of Law
 Awareness programmes should be arranged for the poor, needy women and
parents in case they want to give their child up for adoption, to go through
the correct legal procedures rather than becoming the victims of touts.
Specific recommendations in relation to inter-country adoption:
prevent any risk of children becoming stateless in the inter-country adoption

process, inter alia by ensuring that they will receive the nationality of their
adoptive parents; adopt a particularly vigilant approach during and following
emergency situations to prevent potential abuses and violations of international
obligations.
Non-Hague compliant countries should be encouraged to ratify the treaty.
Professional counseling must be done by a team consisting of recognized child

psychologists, professional social workers and legal practitioners who are familiar
with the international law of the receiving country.
The immigration procedure for the adopted child must be done carefully in order to
prevent child trafficking.
Before the adoption case is opened it should be mandatory to check the bilateral
relationship of the receiving country with India.
&
School of Law
Conclusion
International agreements have been developed to address the changing face of

adoption. The standards and safeguards they establish are essentially directed
towards ensuring four things:
 that the adoptability of children is always determined in the right way.

 that intercountry adoption is considered and carried out for the right reasons.
 that each child is adopted by the right person(s).
 that the adoption is carried out in the right manner.
Inter-country or transnational adoption may become the best option for orphan
children to start a fresh life in a new country. But when the country of domicile for
these children does not have any proper law to show them their destiny, violation
of their rights is very much definite to take place. The country desperately needs
better laws and guideline for inter-country adoption. The authorities need to ensure
thorough checks of every adoption agency to ensure that they are protecting the
child’s rights as has been provided in the constitution and the Juvenile Justice Care
and Protection Act, 2006. Every child has a right to life, home and education. It is
essential that the authorities not only make laws to provide safer transnational
adoption to the children but also to ensure safety of the child even abroad.
It is a common situation in India that the judges dealing with adoption cases,
especially in small towns and cities in India, are not predominantly acquainted with
the interpretation of the inter-country adoption guidelines. Hence, in this regard, a
&
School of Law
uniform but stringent procedure must be developed which can be easily followed
and observed keeping in regard the human spirit. As has been seen, Courts, though
slowly and steadily, are approaching every possible dimension of this issue and are
laying down norms for eliminating any legal or emotional havoc for the child or
his biological and adoptive parents.
Unless agencies systematically refuse to operate in the framework of systems that

are in clear violation of international norms, they may find themselves complicit in
abuses. If prospective adopters do not receive accurate and dispassionate
information on inter-country adoption needs, they will not be able to adjust their
plans and expectations accordingly. Thus, each actor in the process carries a
particular responsibility, and all need to, and must, seek cooperation with one
another to maximize the impact of their efforts.
&
School of Law
UNIT 4
INDIAN LAW RELATING TO FOREIGN JUDGMENT
BASIS OF RECOGNITION
FINALITY, FAILURE
DIRECT EXECUTION OF FOREIGN DECREES
International society in the aftermath of World War II was faced with demands
about culture and identity that placed renewed strain on the principles of legal
equality and cultural difference. The less-favoured states – those which felt
stigmatized – together with indigenous peoples, ethnic groups, minorities, and
women all aspired to secure recognition of their equal dignity and of their specific
identities and rights, with some even seeking reparation for the violation of their
identities and the confiscation of their land or property. To cater for these new
demands, the subjects of international society have developed a new branch of law,
which is referred to here as the ‘international law of recognition’. The aim of this
article is to highlight these developments, to identify the legal practices arising
from this new law of recognition, and to submit them to critical scrutiny.
&
School of Law
A new branch of international law has been emerging since the end of the Cold
War. This ‘international law of recognition’ reflects the new social and cultural
paradigm of the recognition of identities in municipal and international law since
the 1990s. Section 1 of this article outlines the historical and doctrinal background
to this new branch of law, section 2 surveys some of its most interesting current
legal manifestations, and section 3 touches on the difficulties and questions it
raises.
The recognition of others, of their dignity and identities is rooted in what has
always been a diverse and multicultural world, but a world that has only recently
come to terms with this fact. Recognition encompasses all manner of claims about
gender, nation, language, history, culture, or religion. It is a global phenomenon,
extending from East to West and North to South. But even so, it is not self-evident
that there should be so specific a thing as an international law relating to
recognition. In point of fact, it is the outcome of a gradual evolution, which
explains why this branch of law, like the recognition it is based on, has more than
one meaning. The evolutionary pathway has been a complex one, in part because
of the uneasy legacy of colonization. Before the Cold War, expectations as to
recognition were reflected internationally by calls for equal status and equal rights.
In post-Cold War times, those calls have been for the right to be different. This
dissociation between expectations and the series of legal responses in international
law should come as no surprise. It merely reflects the different possible modes of
recognition. Recognition is by no means a uniform process. It varies with the
&
School of Law
prevailing state of international society, the expectations of those involved at any

given time, and the denials of recognition that are encountered.
FOREIGN JUDGMENTS AND DECREES IN INDIA: JUDICIAL TRENDS

INTRODUCTION
The emerging legal issues on “jurisdiction” as regards transactions over the

internet can hardly ignore the legal aspects involved in the execution/enforcement
of foreign decrees. Even after exercise of jurisdiction, the Courts may be unable
to help the plaintiff in getting relief in case the local laws of the country concerned
have certain restrictions for the execution/enforcement of foreign judgements or
decrees in the country.
Under Indian Law, execution of decrees, whether foreign or domestic, is

governed by the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) (as
amended from time to time).
Under the Indian law there are two ways of getting a foreign judgement
enforced.
&
School of Law
Firstly by filing an Execution Petition under Section 44A of the CPC (in case the
conditions specified therein are fulfilled).
Secondly by filing a suit upon the foreign judgement/decree.
Under S. 44A of the CPC, a decree of any of the Superior Courts of any
reciprocating territory are executable as a decree passed by the domestic Court.
Therefore in case the decree does not pertain to a reciprocating territory or a
superior Court of a reciprocating territory, as notified
by the Central Government in the Official Gazette, the decree is not directly
executable in India. In case the decree pertains to a country which is not a
reciprocating territory then a fresh suit 1 will have to be filed in India on the basis of
such a decree or judgement, which may be construed as a cause of action for the
said suit. In the fresh suit, the said decree will be treated as another piece of
evidence against the defendant.
However in both cases the decree has to pass the test of S. 13 CPC which
specifies certain exceptions under which the foreign judgement becomes
inconclusive and is therefore not executable or enforceable in India.
Under S. 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 a foreign judgment
becomes inconclusive and consequently unenforceable in the following
circumstances:
&
School of Law
(a) where it has not been pronounced by a Court of competent

jurisdiction;
(b) where it has not been given on the merits of the case;
(c) where it appears on the face of the proceedings to be founded on an

incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognise the law of
India in cases in which such law is applicable;
(d) where the proceedings in which judgment was obtained are opposed
to natural justice;
(e) where it has been obtained by fraud;
(f) where it sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in force in

India.
In the case of M.K. Sivagaminatha Pillai v. K. Nataraja Pillai, the Madras High
Court held that even though a decree in a foreign court may be passed ex parte, it
will be binding if evidence was taken and the decision was given on a
consideration of the evidence. In this case the defendant was ordered to pay a part
of the suit claim as a security for the purpose of defending the claim. However the
defendant failed to make the payment of the security and on that basis the court
&
School of Law
passed the decree against the defendant. The court on the above principle held that
the judgment and decree was not enforceable in India under S. 13.
&
School of Law
&
School of Law

Law 507 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Law 507 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies

Paper Code :LLB 507 & LLB 509

Subject : PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW

The Conflict of Laws, or as it is more commonly known by the name of Private

It is a branch of national or local laws of the country.

Basis of Private International Law

General and Traditional Rules of Private International Laws

 The validity of marriage is determined by the law of the place where

Unification of Private International Law

FAMILY LAW MATTERS

MATERIAL AND FORMAL VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE

CHOICE OF LAW AND JURISDICTION OF COURTS

Conflict of laws in the matrimonial field has been a phenomenon in India

Subsequently, the Supreme Court of Judicature Act, 1925 defined

In India in contrast, the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 stands as a testament to

consent and breakdown. The former recognizes few grounds such as

JURISDICTION IN ENGLISH LAW

duration and the continuity of the residence as well as other factors of a

JURISDICTION IN INDIAN LAW

However, it is possible that the parties may have failed to establish a

In India, once questions of jurisdiction have been entertained and

RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN DIVORCES

The recognition of foreign divorces in India has come to be codified by the

taken even further by the judgment of the House of Lords in Indyka v.

Following the enactment of the Act of 1971, recognition of foreign divorces

Ghulam Fatima, where a wholesome reading of the provisions of the statute

Each matrimonial law specifies grounds for dissolution of marriage.

Both void and voidable marriages developed in ecclesiastical courts, but

distinction whatsoever between matrimonial causes on the point of

[1] Rajiv Tayal v. Union of India

[2] Narasimha Rao v. Venkata Laxmi

court to whose jurisdiction the parties had both voluntarily and

RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN ADOPTION

ADOPTION BY FOREIGN PARENTS

JURISDICTION UNDER INDIAN AND ENGLISH LAW

Origins of Inter- Country Adoptions

International and regional legislative framework

The system of cooperation established by the HC revolves around a governmental

The HC notably puts in place concrete application of the “subsidiarity principle”,

Formal monitoring of the operation of the HC is entrusted to a “Special

Adoptions from non-Hague countries

Non-Hague countries whose adoption procedures continue to be subject to less

Non-Hague countries therefore tend to be relatively attractive partners for inter-

reductions in Hague-compliant counterparts, rather than genuine instigation to

Adoption following disasters

Laws of Adoption in India

“2(aa)-‘adoption’ means the process through which the adopted child is

Rule 31 speaks about power of the State Government to constitute a Committee to

Concept of Inter-Country Adoption in India

One of the most significant issues in inter-country adoptions is finding prospective

(ii) Though there is no specific number mentioned in the Guidelines as to the

Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA)

It is an Autonomous Body under the Ministry of Women and Child Development,

The CARA guidelines depict in the beginning that it encourages in country

Who are adoptable for inter-country adoption?

Problems subsisting in inter-country adoptions

Child trafficking in the guise of transnational adoption

The biggest threat to the child in inter-country adoption is becoming a victim of

Post adoption negligence

Post adoption domestic succession

Post adoption identity crisis

Guidelines lack force of law

guidelines should have put a maximum number of adoption procedures a month,