Dissolution of marriage — jurisdiction — forum conveniens — Family Proceedings Act 1980, s 157 — Family Proceedings Rules 1981, r 15 — Hindu Marriage Act 1955 (India) — Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (India) — Gilmore v Gilmore [1993] NZFLR 561 — The Spiliada (1986) 3 WLR 927 — CC v DS [2013] NZFLR 578. The applicant sought a dissolution of the parties' marriage which had taken place in India. The applicant lived in New Zealand and the respondent lived in India. The issues for determination before the Court were: whether the applicant had validly served the application for dissolution of marriage on the respondent; whether the applicant was domiciled in New Zealand when he filed his application; if so, whether New Zealand is nonetheless forum non conveniens given the marriage was solemnised in India; and whether a dissolution of marriage made in New Zealand would be recognised in India. Section 157 of the Family Proceedings Act gives a court unfettered discretion to order any steps to be taken to bring proceedings to the notice of the respondent. Here, an order for substituted service had been made and an affidavit confirmed the respondent had been served with the application. The Judge was satisfied that this meant that the respondent had been validly served. The applicant had been in New Zealand on a work visa for several years and had since applied for residency. He had only left New Zealand once in 2017, to fly to India for the parties' wedding. Accordingly the applicant was domiciled in New Zealand and the Court therefore had jurisdiction to hear the proceedings. On the issue of forum conveniens, the burden rested on the respondent to show that India was the more appropriate forum to hear the case. The respondent had not provided evidence of this and the Court deemed New Zealand to be forum conveniens. There was nothing in the present case to suggest that an order dissolving the parties' marriage would not be recognised in India. The Judge therefore granted the applicant's application and made an order dissolving the parties' marriage. Judgment Date: 10 May 2021. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *