Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 25
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-1005 (2026)

International application of chapter

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

25-1005. International application of chapter

A. A court of this state shall treat a foreign country as if it were a state of the United States for the purpose of applying this article and article 2 of this chapter.

B. Except as otherwise provided in subsection C, a child custody determination made in a foreign country under factual circumstances in substantial conformity with the jurisdictional standards of this chapter must be recognized and enforced under article 3 of this chapter.

C. A court of this state is not required to apply this chapter if the child custody law of a foreign country violates fundamental principles of human rights.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2016–2023 · leading case: In Re the Marriage of Margain & Ruiz-Bours, 372 P.3d 313 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Marriage of Margain & Ruiz-Bours, 372 P.3d 313 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 8× “§ 25-1005(A). The plain language of these provisions leads us to conclude that jurisdiction to determine custody of Sophia lies exclusively in the courts of Mexico.”
Antonetti v. Hon. Westerhausen Klinger, 523 P.3d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 4× “2014); see also A.R.S. § 25-1005(A) (“A court of this state shall treat a foreign country as if it were a state of the United States for the purpose of applying [the UCCJEA].”
Williams v. Haddad (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 25-1005(A). 3 Although an Arizona court may decline to apply the UCCJEA if “the child custody law of a foreign country violates fundamental principles of human rights,” A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-1005(A) — 3 cases
In Re the Marriage of Margain & Ruiz-Bours, 372 P.3d 313 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “§ 25-1005(A). The plain language of these provisions leads us to conclude that jurisdiction to determine custody of Sophia lies exclusively in the courts of Mexico.”
Antonetti v. Hon. Westerhausen Klinger, 523 P.3d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “2014); see also A.R.S. § 25-1005(A) (“A court of this state shall treat a foreign country as if it were a state of the United States for the purpose of applying [the UCCJEA].”
Williams v. Haddad (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “A.R.S. § 25-1005(A). 3 Although an Arizona court may decline to apply the UCCJEA if “the child custody law of a foreign country violates fundamental principles of human rights,” A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-1005(B) — 1 case
In Re the Marriage of Margain & Ruiz-Bours, 372 P.3d 313 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “§ 25-1005(A). The plain language of these provisions leads us to conclude that jurisdiction to determine custody of Sophia lies exclusively in the courts of Mexico.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 25-1005(C) — 3 cases
In Re the Marriage of Margain & Ruiz-Bours, 372 P.3d 313 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2016). “§ 25-1005(A). The plain language of these provisions leads us to conclude that jurisdiction to determine custody of Sophia lies exclusively in the courts of Mexico.”
Antonetti v. Hon. Westerhausen Klinger, 523 P.3d 969 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023). “2014); see also A.R.S. § 25-1005(A) (“A court of this state shall treat a foreign country as if it were a state of the United States for the purpose of applying [the UCCJEA].”
Williams v. Haddad (Ariz. Ct. App. 2019). “A.R.S. § 25-1005(A). 3 Although an Arizona court may decline to apply the UCCJEA if “the child custody law of a foreign country violates fundamental principles of human rights,” A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.