Click the case name for better results:

Waple v Surrey County Council: CA 17 Dec 1997

The applicant and her husband had adopted a son. After problems he was taken into care and fostered. The council sought a contribution to the cost of care. The parent requested details as to the circumstances behind the application, and had relayed to them allegations against them. The allegations were withdrawn, and apologised for, but … Continue reading Waple v Surrey County Council: CA 17 Dec 1997

Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others: HL 30 Jul 2009

The claimant sought to enforce a judgment debt against a foreign resident company, and for this purpose to examine or have examined a director who lived abroad. The defendant said that the rules gave no such power and they did, the power was outside the rule-maker’s power. Held: Even though the rule-making power is wide … Continue reading Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co Sal and Others: HL 30 Jul 2009

In Re O (A Minor) (Contact: Imposition of Conditions): CA 17 Mar 1995

The court may impose detailed conditions on the form of indirect contact. His Lordship set out the relevant principles: ‘1 Overriding all else, as provided by section 1(1) of the Children Act 1989, the welfare of the child was the paramount consideratin, and the court was concerned with the interests of the mother and the … Continue reading In Re O (A Minor) (Contact: Imposition of Conditions): CA 17 Mar 1995

In Re D (a Minor) (Contact: Mother’s Hostility): CA 1993

Waite LJ: ‘It is now well settled that the implacable hostility of a mother towards access or contact is a factor which is capable, according to the circumstances of each particular case, of supplying a cogent reason for departing from the general pronciple that a child should grow up in the knowledge of both his … Continue reading In Re D (a Minor) (Contact: Mother’s Hostility): CA 1993

J v C and E (a Child) (Void Marriage: Status of Children): CA 15 May 2006

The parties had lived together as a married couple. They had had a child together by artificial insemination. It was then revealed that Mr J was a woman. The parties split up, and Mr J applied for an order for contact with the child. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The HFEA Act required that to … Continue reading J v C and E (a Child) (Void Marriage: Status of Children): CA 15 May 2006

O and others (Children); In re O (Children), In re W-R (a Child), In re W (Children): CA 22 Jun 2005

In each case litigants in person had sought to be allowed to have the assistance and services of a Mackenzie friend in children cases. In one case, the court had not allowed confidential documents to be disclosed to the friend. Held: The courts had been unhelpful to the parties appearing before them. If given access … Continue reading O and others (Children); In re O (Children), In re W-R (a Child), In re W (Children): CA 22 Jun 2005

A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: SC 14 Jun 2017

The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled women who were citizens of the UK, but who were usually resident … Continue reading A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: SC 14 Jun 2017

Coll, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 24 May 2017

The appellant female prisoner asserted that the much smaller number of probation and bail hostels provided for women prisoners when released on licence was discriminatory in leaving greater numbers of women far removed from their families. Held: A declaration was granted: ‘The provision of Approved Premises in England and Wales by the Secretary of State … Continue reading Coll, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 24 May 2017

In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000

Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The parents, devout Roman Catholics, resisted. Held: The parents’ views were subject to the overriding … Continue reading In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000

Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission: HL 1989

At the council’s independent, single-sex grammar schools there were more places available for boys than girls. Consequently the council were obliged to set a higher pass mark for girls than boys in the grammar school entrance examination. Held: The council, as local education authority, had discriminated against girls. Discrimination can take place when a woman … Continue reading Regina v Birmingham City Council ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission: HL 1989

In re N (A Child); A v G: FD 17 Jul 2009

The unmarried parents fought bitterly over residence contact with the child. Judges: Munby J Citations: [2009] EWHC 1807 (Fam) Links: Bailii Statutes: Children Act 1989 8 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See Also – N (A Child), Re; A v G (Family Proceedings: Disclosure) FD 8-Jul-2009 Application in respect of the proposed disclosure to the … Continue reading In re N (A Child); A v G: FD 17 Jul 2009

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council v Grant: FD 17 Sep 2001

The council cancelled the respondent’s registration as a child minder. The respondent appealed to the Magistrates, and succeeded, the court finding that the process undertaken by the council had infringed his rights. On appeal the council succeeded. The magistrates should have looked beyond procedural issues. The appeal to them required a hearing de novo. The … Continue reading Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council v Grant: FD 17 Sep 2001

Re L (Children), (Care Proceedings: Significant Harm): CA 25 Aug 2006

The Court allowed an appeal by parents against a judge’s conclusion that their children had suffered and were likely to suffer significant harm and it remitted the issue for re-hearing. The professional evidence had been that the parents’ deficiencies had had ‘subtle and ambiguous consequences’ for the children. Such consequences could not amount to significant … Continue reading Re L (Children), (Care Proceedings: Significant Harm): CA 25 Aug 2006

Desnousse v London Borough of Newham and others: CA 17 May 2006

The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out to evict her. She claimed that the authority had to get a court authority before so evicting her. … Continue reading Desnousse v London Borough of Newham and others: CA 17 May 2006

AD and OH (A Child) v Bury Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 17 Jan 2006

The claimants, mother and son, sought damages from the respondent after they had commenced care proceedings resulting in the son being taken into temporary care. The authority had wrongly suspected abuse. The boy was later found to suffer brittle bone disease. Held: The court could not have made the interim order sought without first concluding … Continue reading AD and OH (A Child) v Bury Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 17 Jan 2006

P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public): FD 2003

The applicant sought a joint residence order, and for a declaration that the rules preventing such hearings being in public breached the requirement for a public hearing. Held: Both FPR 1991 rule 4.16(7) and section 97 are compatible with the fair trial provisions of Article 61) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human … Continue reading P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public): FD 2003

PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: SC 19 Jul 2017

No anonymity for investigation suspect The claimant had been investigated on an allegation of historic sexual abuse. He had never been charged, but the investigation had continued with others being convicted in a high profile case. He appealed from refusal of orders restricting publication of his name and involvement in the inquiry. Held: (Kerr and … Continue reading PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: SC 19 Jul 2017

Carson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 17 Jun 2003

The claimant Reynolds challenged the differential treatment by age of jobseeker’s allowance. Carson complained that as a foreign resident pensioner, her benefits had not been uprated. The questions in each case were whether the benefit affected a ‘possession’ within the Convention or the discrimination was arbitrary so as to breach the applicants human rights. Held: … Continue reading Carson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 17 Jun 2003

Regina v Hertfordshire County Council, ex parte Green Environmental Industries Ltd and Another: HL 17 Feb 2000

A notice was given to the holder of a waste disposal licence to require certain information to be provided on pain of prosecution. The provision of such information could also then be evidence against the provider of the commission of a criminal offence. Held: Nevertheless, the provision of such information was required in this case, … Continue reading Regina v Hertfordshire County Council, ex parte Green Environmental Industries Ltd and Another: HL 17 Feb 2000

Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB: Admn 17 Oct 1996

Sperm which had been taken from a dying and unconscious man may not be used for the later insemination of his surviving wife. The Act required his written consent. Held: Community Law does not assist the Applicant. The question had been considered in Parliament, and allowing for the limitations on the powers of courts exercising … Continue reading Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB: Admn 17 Oct 1996

Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure): FD 19 Mar 2004

The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings be in public. Held: The applicant and her solicitors had already made significant … Continue reading Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure): FD 19 Mar 2004

Practice Direction (Court of Appeal) (Civil Division): CA 19 Apr 1999

As part of the modernisation and reform of civil procedure, all the principal Court of Appeal practice directions are consolidated now into this one document handed down by the court.‘2. Permission to appeal2.1 When is permission required?2.1.1. Most appeals require the permission of the court below (the court which made the decision which is challenged) … Continue reading Practice Direction (Court of Appeal) (Civil Division): CA 19 Apr 1999

In re M (a Child) (Disclosure: Children and Family Reporter): CA 31 Jul 2002

A Children and Family reporter became concerned at the possibility of abuse of children as a result of information gained whilst involved in private law proceedings. He sought to report those concerns to the statutory authorities. It had become clear that it was crucially important that professions within the child care professions must communicate properly … Continue reading In re M (a Child) (Disclosure: Children and Family Reporter): CA 31 Jul 2002

In re A (A Minor) (Wardship: Police Caution): FD 28 Jun 1989

The Court considered the role of the wardship court where the police wished to caution a ward of court. The question fell into two parts. In relation to the first, Cazalet J said this: ‘The decision as to whether to caution in lieu of prosecuting is a matter which is wholly within the discretion of … Continue reading In re A (A Minor) (Wardship: Police Caution): FD 28 Jun 1989

A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening): SC 9 Sep 2013

Acquisition of Habitual Residence Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day. Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member state such as the United States. The Regulation also deals with how child … Continue reading A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening): SC 9 Sep 2013

Re E (Children) (Abduction: Custody Appeal): SC 10 Jun 2011

Two children were born in Norway to a British mother (M) and Norwegian father (F). Having lived in Norway, M brought them to England to stay, but without F’s knowledge or consent. M replied to his application for their return that the children would be at risk if returned, alleging psychological abuse by F. She … Continue reading Re E (Children) (Abduction: Custody Appeal): SC 10 Jun 2011

Ellis v Wallsend District Hospital: 1989

(Court of Appeal of New South Wales) Samuels JA discussed the circumstances in which a non-delegable duty of care arises: ‘It arises from a relationship which combines the dependence of A upon the reasonable care, skill and judgment of B with the legitimate expectation that B will ensure that those qualities will be exercised in … Continue reading Ellis v Wallsend District Hospital: 1989

Gray v Thames Trains and Others: HL 17 Jun 2009

The claimant suffered psychiatric injury in a rail crash caused by the defendant’s negligence. Under this condition of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, the claimant had later gone on to kill another person, and he had been detained under section 41. He now sought damages for his loss of earnings through detention in prison and mental hospital. … Continue reading Gray v Thames Trains and Others: HL 17 Jun 2009

In re C (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment): CA 1989

Citations: [1989] 2 All ER 782, [1989] 3 WLR 240, [1990] Fam 26 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: See also – Re C (Wardship: Medical Treatment) (No 2) CA 1989 The court had already made an order about the way in which the health professionals were able to look after a severely disabled baby girl; … Continue reading In re C (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment): CA 1989

Regina (Stewart) v Wandsworth London Borough Council and Others: QBD 17 Sep 2001

The words ‘within their area’ in the section had to be read consistently with other parts of the Act, and therefore, the duty to carry out an assessment if a child had a physical connection with the area. A temporary housing in a homeless hostel within the authority district was sufficient. Judges: Mr Jack Beatson, … Continue reading Regina (Stewart) v Wandsworth London Borough Council and Others: QBD 17 Sep 2001

In Re B (A Minor: Contact Order): FD 8 Apr 1994

In a disputed contact case, the parties had agreed that their should be monitored interim access, and this was supported by the Court Welfare Officer. The magistrates declined to make an order fearing that this would delay the final order. Held: The Justices had been wrong to refuse to make the order. Delay would principally … Continue reading In Re B (A Minor: Contact Order): FD 8 Apr 1994

In Re B (Minors) (Contact): CA 3 Feb 1993

The Judge had a discretion to look again at the natural mother’s case before making an adoption order. In order to minimise delay in any case, and to facilitate efficient decision-making, the court could, exercising its wide judicial discretion, consider the application for leave to apply for an order revoking the placement order on a … Continue reading In Re B (Minors) (Contact): CA 3 Feb 1993

Re L (Fact-Finding Hearing: Fairness): CA 17 Feb 2022

‘The principal issue arising on this appeal in care proceedings concerning a little girl, L, is whether the process by which the recorder reached the conclusion that the threshold criteria under s.31 of the Children Act 1989 were satisfied was fair. The appellant, Z, who is L’s father, contends that certain of the findings made … Continue reading Re L (Fact-Finding Hearing: Fairness): CA 17 Feb 2022

Regina v Barnet London Borough Council Ex Parte B and Others: QBD 17 Nov 1993

A Local Authority has to balance its duties to provide nurseries against financial constraints. The section sets out duties of a general character which are intended to be for the benefit of children in need in the local social services authority’s area in general. The other duties and the specific duties which then follow must … Continue reading Regina v Barnet London Borough Council Ex Parte B and Others: QBD 17 Nov 1993

Smith v Eric S Bush, a firm etc: HL 20 Apr 1989

In Smith, the lender instructed a valuer who knew that the buyer and mortgagee were likely to rely on his valuation alone. The valuer said his terms excluded responsibility. The mortgagor had paid an inspection fee to the building society and received a copy of the report, and relying on it, had bought the house. … Continue reading Smith v Eric S Bush, a firm etc: HL 20 Apr 1989

CN and Another v Poole Borough Council: CA 21 Dec 2017

The court considered the existence of a tortious duty of care to children, on the part of a local authority, to protect them from harassment and abuse by third parties. The Council appealed against an order re-instating the claims after they had been struck out. Held: The appeal was allowed. Two considerations in particular militated … Continue reading CN and Another v Poole Borough Council: CA 21 Dec 2017

Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004

The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious faiths. Held: A distinction was to be made between domestic cases involving actions within … Continue reading Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004

JA (Meaning of “Access Rights”): UTIAC 17 Apr 2015

UTIAC 1. Where the Immigration Rules are silent as to interpretation, it may be necessary to refer to the Children Act 1989 (as amended) and other family legislation in order to construe those parts of the Rules which provide a route to entry clearance or leave to remain as a parent. 2. ‘Access’ in the … Continue reading JA (Meaning of “Access Rights”): UTIAC 17 Apr 2015

Re C (Children): SC 14 Feb 2018

‘This appeal concerns the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. It raises general questions relating to: (1) the place which the habitual residence of the child occupies in the scheme of that Convention, and (2) whether and when a wrongful retention of a child may occur if the travelling parent originally … Continue reading Re C (Children): SC 14 Feb 2018

Sutton London Borough Council v Davis: FD 17 Mar 1994

Local Authority need not be inflexible in assessing fitness of child minder – smacking. A child minder refusing to sign Local Authority’s no-smack undertaking can still be registered. Gazette 18-May-1994, Independent 17-Mar-1994, Times 17-Mar-1994 Children Act 1989 77(6) England and Wales Citing: See Also – Sutton London Borough Council v Davis (Number 2) FD 8-Jul-1994 … Continue reading Sutton London Borough Council v Davis: FD 17 Mar 1994

Blankley v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Trust: QBD 5 Feb 2014

The court was asked whether, where a party loses mental capacity in the course of proceedings, such loss of capacity has the automatic and immediate effect of terminating their solicitor’s retainer. The Costs judge had held that, as a matter of law, a supervening incapacity even if intermittent, automatically frustrates and thereby terminates a contract … Continue reading Blankley v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Trust: QBD 5 Feb 2014

Child X (Residence and Contact- Rights of Media Attendance) (Rev 2): FD 14 Jul 2009

The father applied to the court to have the media excluded from the hearing into the residence and contact claims relating to his daughter. Held: It was for the party seeking such an order to justify it. In deciding whether or not to exclude the press in the welfare or privacy interests of a party … Continue reading Child X (Residence and Contact- Rights of Media Attendance) (Rev 2): FD 14 Jul 2009

Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the Convention the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself are generally recognised international … Continue reading Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

London Borough of Redbridge v A, B and E (Failure To Comply With Directions): FD 17 Oct 2016

Authority’s Failure to comply with directions The court considered the failure by the local authority applicant repeatedly to comply with court orders whils applying for care orders. Held: ‘Case management directions are not mere administrative pedantry. The seemingly mundane nature of case management directions belies the fact that they are crucial to the fair administration … Continue reading London Borough of Redbridge v A, B and E (Failure To Comply With Directions): FD 17 Oct 2016

Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002

In Re G (A Minor) (Interim Care Order: Residential Assessment); G (Children), In Re (Residence: Same Sex Partner): HL 26 Jul 2006

The parties had been a lesbian couple each with children. Each now was in a new relationship. One registered the two daughters of the other at a school now local to her but without first consulting the birth mother, who then applied for residence and or contact. The other mother took the children secretly to … Continue reading In Re G (A Minor) (Interim Care Order: Residential Assessment); G (Children), In Re (Residence: Same Sex Partner): HL 26 Jul 2006

Re Gard (A Child): FD 24 Jul 2017

The baby boy suffered life threatening conditions. Doctors at the hospital sought directions to allow the withdrawal of life support. His parents wanted him to be given the chance of experimental treatment in the US. In April a declaration had been made allowing the withdrawal of life support. The parents appeals had been rejected by … Continue reading Re Gard (A Child): FD 24 Jul 2017

Woodland v The Swimming Teachers’ Association and Others: QBD 17 Oct 2011

The court was asked as to the vicarious or other liability of a school where a pupil suffered injury at a swimming lesson with a non-employee during school time, and in particular whether it had a non-delegable duty to ensure the welfare of children during school time. The pool supervision wasthrough employees of a company … Continue reading Woodland v The Swimming Teachers’ Association and Others: QBD 17 Oct 2011

Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills v The Interim Executive Board of Al-Hijrah School: CA 13 Oct 2017

Single Sex Schooling failed to prepare for life The Chief Inspector appealed from a decision that it was discriminatory under the 2010 Act to educate girls and boys in the same school but under a system providing effective complete separation of the sexes. Held: The action was discriminatory. However, the scheme operated against individuals, both … Continue reading Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills v The Interim Executive Board of Al-Hijrah School: CA 13 Oct 2017

ZM v JM; Re M (children) (fact-finding hearing: burden of proof); In re M (a Child) (Non-accidental injury: Burden of proof): CA 19 Nov 2008

When a court considered which of two parents might be responsible for a non-accidental injury to their child, what the court cannot do is decide that one parent is the perpetrator but that the other parent cannot be excluded as the perpetrator. Counsel had not brought to the attention of the court when applying for … Continue reading ZM v JM; Re M (children) (fact-finding hearing: burden of proof); In re M (a Child) (Non-accidental injury: Burden of proof): CA 19 Nov 2008

In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening): HL 11 Jun 2008

Balance of probabilities remains standard of proof There had been cross allegations of abuse within the family, and concerns by the authorities for the children. The judge had been unable to decide whether the child had been shown to be ‘likely to suffer significant harm’ as a consequence. Having found some evidence to suggest that … Continue reading In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening): HL 11 Jun 2008

In re S-B (Children) (Care proceedings: Standard of proof): SC 14 Dec 2009

A child was found to have bruising consistent with physical abuse. Either or both parents might have caused it, but the judge felt it likely that only one had, that he was unable to decide which, and that they were not so serious that he had to say that the other must have known. Held: … Continue reading In re S-B (Children) (Care proceedings: Standard of proof): SC 14 Dec 2009

JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry: HL 1989

An undisclosed principal will not be permitted to claim to be party to a contract if this is contrary to the terms of the contract itself. Thus the provision in the standard form B contract of the London Metal Exchange ‘this contract is made between ourselves and yourselves as principals, we alone being liable to … Continue reading JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry: HL 1989

JA (Meaning of Access Rights”): UTIAC 17 Apr 2015″

References: [2015] UKUT 225 (IAC) Links: Bailii Coram: Clive Lane UTJ UTIAC 1. Where the Immigration Rules are silent as to interpretation, it may be necessary to refer to the Children Act 1989 (as amended) and other family legislation in order to construe those parts of the Rules which provide a route to entry clearance … Continue reading JA (Meaning of Access Rights”): UTIAC 17 Apr 2015″

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

H and others v London Borough of Wandsworth and others: Admn 23 Apr 2007

In three linked cases, unaccompanied asylum-seeking children had had assistance with housing from the local social services authorities. They claimed entitlement to support as former relevant children under section 20. The local authorities argued that they had provided accommodation under section 17 rather than section 20 of the 1989 Act. Held: Once the section 20 … Continue reading H and others v London Borough of Wandsworth and others: Admn 23 Apr 2007

ES, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham: Admn 27 Mar 2013

The claimant sought judicial review of the Defendant’s failure to assess her son’s needs for the purposes of providing accommodation and support under section 17 of the 1989 Act. While the case is specific to its particular facts, it raises the question of the extent to which the Defendant could rely upon the Secretary of … Continue reading ES, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham: Admn 27 Mar 2013

AC, Regina (on the Application of) v Birmingham City Council: Admn 18 Nov 2008

Caim for judicial review brought by the mother of four children against a decision made by Birmingham City Council relating to payments to be made to her for both her benefit and that of the children, under provisions of the Children Act, in particular section 17, but also potentially section 20. The overall effect of … Continue reading AC, Regina (on the Application of) v Birmingham City Council: Admn 18 Nov 2008

W, Regina (on the Application of) v North Lincolnshire Council: Admn 30 Jul 2008

W sought assistance from the Council. As a 17 year old without significant family support he had been released from custody and was entitled to admitted support under section 20 of the 1989 Act. Judges: Mackie QC J Citations: [2008] EWHC 2299 (Admin), [2008] 2 FLR 2150, [2008] Fam Law 1196 Links: Bailii Statutes: Children … Continue reading W, Regina (on the Application of) v North Lincolnshire Council: Admn 30 Jul 2008

Regina (A) v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 5 Nov 2001

The provisions requiring local authorities to look to the welfare of children within their area was a general one, and was not enforceable to secure the interests of individual children. It was not the case that a ‘target’ duty crystallised into an enforceable one, once a child’s needs had been assessed. If that had been … Continue reading Regina (A) v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 5 Nov 2001

M v London Borough of Islington and Another: CA 2 Apr 2004

The applicant asylum seeker had had her application refused, and was awaiting a removal order. She had a child and asked the authority to house her pending her removal. Held: Provided she was not in breach of the removal order, the council had power to provide her with assistance. Though the authority had no duty … Continue reading M v London Borough of Islington and Another: CA 2 Apr 2004

Regina (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 29 Nov 2002

The League challenged the respondent’s statement in the Prisons’ Handbook that children held in young offender institutions were not subject to the protection of the 1989 Act. Held: Neither the Prison Act and Rules excluded the Prison authorities from the list of those required to co-operate with local authorities in the exercise of their duties … Continue reading Regina (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 29 Nov 2002

Regina (W) v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 3 May 2002

A family had been found to be voluntarily homeless. The family asked the authority to provide housing to the family under the 1989 Act from its duty to care for the children. Held: The 1989 Act did not change the law in the 1980 Act. The authority had a power to assist and Another child … Continue reading Regina (W) v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 3 May 2002

A v The London Borough of Lambeth: Admn 25 May 2001

The applicant was mother of three children, two of whom were autistic. She sought re-housing from the defendant. It was claimed that s17 imposed a specific duty on the authority, having identified a child’s needs, in this case for re-housing, to satisfy them. Held: The structure the section is general, and point very clearly to … Continue reading A v The London Borough of Lambeth: Admn 25 May 2001

Regina (on the Application of AB and SB) v Nottingham City Council: Admn 30 Mar 2001

A local authoity’s failure to fulfil its obligations may be the subject of a mandatory order in approriate cases. The Court ordered a local authority to carry out a full assessment of a child’s needs in accordance with the guidance given by the Secretary of State in ‘Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of AB and SB) v Nottingham City Council: Admn 30 Mar 2001