The Court delivered on 5 September 2019 its judgment in Case C‑468/18 (R v P), which is about Articles 3 and 5 of the Maintenance Regulation:

“Article 3(a) and (d) and Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 […] must be interpreted as meaning that where there is an action before a court of a Member State which includes three claims concerning, respectively, the divorce of the parents of a minor child, parental responsibility in respect of that child and the maintenance obligation with regard to that child, the court ruling on the divorce, which has declared that it has no jurisdiction to rule on the claim concerning parental responsibility, nevertheless has jurisdiction to rule on the claim concerning the maintenance obligation with regard to that child where it is also the court for the place where the defendant is habitually resident or the court before which the defendant has entered an appearance, without contesting the jurisdiction of that court”.

Source: here