§ 19-9-67.Finding of inconvenient forum; conditions

Having jurisdiction doesn’t mean a Georgia court must use it. Under this section, a court with jurisdiction to make a custody determination may decline at any time if it decides that it is an inconvenient forum and that a court of another state is a more appropriate forum. A party may raise the issue by motion, the court may raise it on its own, or another court may request it.

Before deciding, the court shall consider whether it is appropriate for a court of another state to exercise jurisdiction. It shall let the parties submit information and shall consider all relevant factors, including eight the statute lists: whether family violence has occurred and is likely to continue, and which state could best protect the parties and the child; how long the child has lived outside Georgia; the distance between the Georgia court and the court in the other state; the parties’ relative financial circumstances; any agreement of the parties about which state should take jurisdiction; the nature and location of the evidence, including the child’s testimony; each court’s ability to decide the issue expeditiously and the procedures needed to present the evidence; and each court’s familiarity with the facts and issues. The statute doesn’t rank the factors, and the list isn’t exclusive.

If the court decides Georgia is inconvenient and another state is more appropriate, it shall stay the case on the condition that a custody case be promptly commenced in another designated state, and it may add any other condition it considers just and proper. A Georgia court can also split the case: under subsection (d), it may decline jurisdiction over custody that is incidental to a divorce or other proceeding while keeping the divorce or other proceeding. A decision under this section matters elsewhere in the Act — §§ 19-9-61 and 19-9-63 both turn in part on whether a court has found another forum more appropriate.