Foro Inconveniente en Determinaciones de Custodia de Menores

Explicación Simple

A veces, un tribunal puede decidir que no es el mejor lugar para resolver un problema de custodia de un niño. En su lugar, puede ser mejor que otro tribunal en otro estado se encargue del caso.

Es como cuando estás organizando una fiesta y te das cuenta de que tu casa es demasiado pequeña. Entonces decides que es mejor hacerla en la casa de un amigo que tiene más espacio.

Ejemplo Práctico

Imagina que Ana y Luis, dos padres que viven en diferentes estados, no se ponen de acuerdo sobre la custodia de su hijo. Si el tribunal de Pennsylvania considera que el tribunal de Luis en Florida puede manejar mejor el caso, podría decidir que es un foro inconveniente y permitir que el caso se resuelva allí.

Texto Original del Estatuto (Inglés)

23 Pa.C.S. 5427 - Inconvenient Forum (a) General rule.--A court of this Commonwealth which has jurisdiction under this chapter to make a child custody determination may decline to exercise its jurisdiction at any time if it determines that it is an inconvenient forum under the circumstances and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum. The issue of inconvenient forum may be raised upon motion of a party, the court's own motion or request of another court. (b) Factors.--Before determining whether it is an inconvenient forum, a court of this Commonwealth shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of another state to exercise jurisdiction. For this purpose, the court shall allow the parties to submit information and shall consider all relevant factors, including: (1) whether domestic violence has occurred and is likely to continue in the future and which state could best protect the parties and the child; (2) the length of time the child has resided outside this Commonwealth; (3) the distance between the court in this Commonwealth and the court in the state that would assume jurisdiction; (4) the relative financial circumstances of the parties; (5) any agreement of the parties as to which state should assume jurisdiction; (6) the nature and location of the evidence required to resolve the pending litigation, including testimony of the child; (7) the ability of the court of each state to decide the issue expeditiously and the procedures necessary to present the evidence; and (8) the familiarity of the court of each state with the facts and issues in the pending litigation. (c) Stay.--If a court of this Commonwealth determines that it is an inconvenient forum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum, it shall stay the proceedi