§ 19-9-68.Wrongfully obtained jurisdiction; actions to prevent repetition of unjustifiable conduct; expenses
Chapter 9. Child Custody Proceedings · Article 3. Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act · Part 2. Jurisdiction · Last amended 2001 · Last verified October 9, 2026
Full Text of § 19-9-68
Plain-English Summary
This section keeps a parent from profiting from misconduct. If a Georgia court has jurisdiction because the person asking it to act engaged in unjustifiable conduct, the court shall decline to exercise that jurisdiction. The statute doesn’t define unjustifiable conduct; the judge decides whether the facts amount to it. The rule yields to temporary emergency jurisdiction under § 19-9-64 and to any other Georgia law that provides otherwise.
The court may keep the case only in three situations: the parents and all persons acting as parents have acquiesced in Georgia’s exercise of jurisdiction; a court of the state that would otherwise have jurisdiction under §§ 19-9-61 through 19-9-63 determines that Georgia is the more appropriate forum under § 19-9-67; or no court of any other state would have jurisdiction under §§ 19-9-61 through 19-9-63.
Declining isn’t the end of the court’s role. It may fashion an appropriate remedy to keep the child safe and prevent a repeat of the conduct, including staying the case until a custody case is commenced in a court with jurisdiction. And when it dismisses a petition or stays a case for this reason, it shall assess necessary and reasonable expenses against the party who sought to invoke its jurisdiction — costs, communication expenses, attorney’s fees, investigative fees, witness expenses, travel expenses and child care during the proceedings. The only escape is for the party facing the assessment to establish that it would be clearly inappropriate. The court may not assess these amounts against the State of Georgia unless some law other than the Act authorizes it.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if my ex brought our child to Georgia without permission to file for custody here?
If the judge finds that Georgia has jurisdiction because the person invoking it engaged in unjustifiable conduct, § 19-9-68 says the court shall decline to exercise that jurisdiction unless one of three exceptions applies. The statute doesn’t define unjustifiable conduct, so whether a particular move qualifies is for the judge to decide on the facts.
When can a Georgia court keep a custody case despite unjustifiable conduct?
In three situations. The parents and all persons acting as parents acquiesced in Georgia’s jurisdiction; a court of the state otherwise having jurisdiction determines Georgia is the more appropriate forum under § 19-9-67; or no court of any other state would have jurisdiction under §§ 19-9-61 through 19-9-63. Temporary emergency jurisdiction under § 19-9-64 also remains available.
Who pays attorney’s fees when a Georgia court declines jurisdiction for unjustifiable conduct?
The party who invoked the court’s jurisdiction, usually. When the court dismisses or stays for this reason, § 19-9-68(c) says it shall assess necessary and reasonable expenses against that party, including costs, communication expenses, attorney’s fees, investigative fees, witness expenses, travel expenses and child care, unless that party establishes the assessment would be clearly inappropriate.
Can the court protect my child while it declines jurisdiction?
Yes. Under § 19-9-68(b), a court that declines jurisdiction for unjustifiable conduct may fashion an appropriate remedy to ensure the child’s safety and prevent a repetition of the conduct. One option the statute names is staying the case until a custody case is commenced in a court with jurisdiction under §§ 19-9-61 through 19-9-63.
Can expenses be assessed against the state in this kind of case?
Not under this section alone. Section 19-9-68(c) says the court may not assess fees, costs or expenses against the state unless a law other than the Act authorizes it. The mandatory assessment runs against the party who sought to invoke the court’s jurisdiction.
Amendment History
Laws 2001, p. 129, § 1.