Bibliographic record
Abstract
The operation of habitual residence in International Family Law is topical with regard to the determination of international jurisdiction, referring to international competence and applicable law.It is a factual notion introduced by the Hague Conference on Private International Law, intentionally without an international definition being provided.The reason of such 'vacuum legis' is that habitual residence, as a prevailing connecting factor specifically in the field of child protection, should respond to the better proximity between the beneficiary of the Treaties (i.e.Hague Child Protection Conventions and EU Parental Responsibility Regulation) and the State authorities internationally competent.Increasing international mobility, crosscultural marriages, migration fluxes may involve children establishing attachments with more than one Country.Therefore other notions, connecting factors, such as domicile that is corroborated by an 'artificial or technical definition' requiring a 'permanent intent', and nationality that may face remoteness between the child and the State, could hardly assess proximity.Especially in a rapidly evolving context where the 'international settlement' of a child, according to his/her wish, or that of his/her parent/s, in one given Country should be assessable in a particular moment in time so that he or she could access justice in that Country.Access to justice means in the case of cross-border family conflicts as to guarantee parental responsibility and visitation to a child, to allow him/her a harmonious development within a suitable family environment, a parent-child relationship, as far as possible, and that all decisions should be taken in the child's best interests.The principle of proximity should reflect the access to justice in a State that is close to protect the child's interests.2 The Oxford dictionary defines the term 'habitual' as « something done regularly, constantly or as a habit ».The Cambridge dictionary defines the term 'residence' as « the place of staying or living ».Duhaime's Law dictionary concludes that in accordance with case law from UK, US and Canada taken as references, the term 'habitual residence' refers to « a place of settled dwelling which constitutes a person's ordinary residence ».The issue here lies in the existence of 'quasi-definitions' of habitual residence mentioned not only in the dictionaries referred to as basic cultural information but also in some of the national civil codes, private international law acts or even habitual residence acts.This may be considered as contrary 3 to what was 1 Assistant Lecturer at the Department of Private International Law. 2 Brussels II bis, recital 12: « The grounds of jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility established in the present Regulation are shaped in the light of the best interests of the child, in particular on the criterion of proximity.This means that jurisdiction should lie in the first place with the Member State of the child's habitual residence, except for certain cases of a change in the child's residence or pursuant to an agreement between the holders of parental responsibility ». 3 P. LAGARDE, Explanatory Report on the 1996 Hague Child Protection Convention, § 40: « The discussion bore only on the desirability of inserting into the text of the Convention, a provision defining, for its purposes, the concept of habitual
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".