Family team successfully represent high-profile businessman in High Court jurisdiction dispute case
min readThe Charles Russell Speechlys family team have successfully acted for a high-profile businessman in an Anglo-Swiss-Spanish jurisdiction dispute heard at High Court level in the Family Court.
The applicant, Ms Lazcano, who is a resident of Mallorca, filed an English application for nullity in mid-2025. The parties both accepted that they were never legally married following a ceremony that took place in Mallorca in 2017, but under English law certain types of invalid marriage (known as ‘void’ or ‘voidable’ marriages) can be annulled by the Court and result in financial claims identical to those that arise on divorce. The respondent argued that the ceremony in question was a ‘non-qualifying ceremony’ and was therefore not capable of annulment or giving rise to consequent financial claims.
The respondent, Mr Haines, was born in England but left the country shortly after he finished university to build a successful business and family life, first in Germany and then latterly in Switzerland where he remains living. Ms Lazcano alleged that Mr Haines retained his English domicile of origin and that the English Court therefore had jurisdiction to deal with this matter, notwithstanding that neither party lives in England.
On receipt of the application, Charles Russell Speechlys applied on behalf of Mr Haines for the dismissal of the nullity application on two grounds - first on the basis that there was no jurisdiction for the English court to hear this matter as Mr Haines no longer retained his English domicile, and second on the basis that, in any event, the ceremony in question was a non-qualifying ceremony and therefore the alleged marriage was not capable of annulment and the resultant financial claims.
At a case management hearing in January, we successfully argued on behalf of our client that the Court should deal with the issue of domicile as a preliminary issue. Following highly contested proceedings, to include a number of interim applications and a domicile trial before Mr Justice Cusworth in the High Court in June, judgment has now been handed down vindicating our client’s case throughout that his English domicile of origin was replaced first by a German domicile of choice in the 1980s and then subsequently a Swiss domicile of choice over 15 years ago. As a result, Ms Lazcano’s claims have been dismissed wholesale.
The reported judgment (Lazcano Mendez v Haines [2026] EWFC 213) sets out a summary of the law on domicile and in particular addresses the circumstances in which a domicile of choice can be acquired (and lost).
The case was run by a team across the firm’s London and Geneva offices, lead jointly by Dr Michael Wells-Greco (Partner, Geneva) and Miranda Fisher (Partner, London), supported by Matt Foster (Senior Associate, London) and Isobel Asti (Associate, London). Katie Cowton KC and Joe Rainer, both of Queen Elizabeth Building, were instructed as counsel.
This case solidifies Charles Russell Speechlys’ reputation as one of the top tier family law firms and highlights our expertise in dealing with high value and international cases, in particular showcasing the firm’s experience in jurisdiction disputes and advising on where proceedings should properly be brought, how domicile is assessed and offering seamless cross-border Anglo-Swiss advice and representation.
“This does mean that when Ms Lazcano’s nullity petition was issued in August 2025, with its jurisdiction based on Mr Haines’ domicile then in England and Wales, this Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain it.”
