Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Children - From: 2003 To: 2003

This page lists 101 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.

 
In re B (Appeal: Lack of Reasons) [2003] 2 FLR 1035
2003

Thorpe LJ
Children

1 Citers


 
P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public) [2003] 3 FCR 523; [2003] EWHC 1541 (Fam); [2004] 1 FLR 171
2003
FD
Bennett J
Children, Human Rights
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 Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 - Children Act 1989 97 - Family Proceedings Rules 1991 4.16(7)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Re M (Intractable Contact Dispute: Interim Care Orders) [2003] 2 FLR 636; [2003] EWHC Fam 1024
2003
FD
Wall J
Children
The mother had persuaded her children of the lie that their father had physically and sexually abused them, and that their paternal grandparents were also a danger to them. She would not allow any contact with them, and disobeyed court orders for contact. Held: Her conduct was causing the children significant harm. The court invited the local authority to take care proceedings, the outcome of which was the removal of the children from their mother, and residence orders in favour of their father. This was a clear case of parental alienation.
1 Citers


 
In re L (Care proceedings: Human Rights Claims) [2003] 2 FLR 160
2003

Munby J
Children, Human Rights
The court set out appropriate procedures designed to human rights claims, even properly brought, from de-railing care proceedings.
1 Citers


 
Practice Direction (Care Cases: Judicial Continuity and Judicial Case Management) [2003] 2 FLR 719
2003


Children

1 Citers


 
Re F (Shared Residence Order) [2003] 2 FLR 397
2003
CA

Children
A shared residence order had been made for two small children, even though the parents lived a considerable distance apart. Held: The decision was correct. The distance did not prevent dividing the children's year between the two homes. A shared residence order had to reflect the underlying reality of where the children lived their lives, and was not made to deal with parental status. Any lingering idea that a shared residence order was apt only where the children alternated between the two homes evenly was erroneous. If the home offered by each parent was of equal status and importance to the children an order for shared residence would be valuable.
1 Citers


 
Re ET (Serious Injuries: Standard of Proof) [2003] 2 FLR 1205
2003
FD
Bodey J
Evidence, Children
The court heard a care application in which the baby had sustained skull, brain and other injuries alleged to be at the hands of her parents. Held: The standard of proof was the civil standard of the balance of probabilities and directed himself according to the principles in re H. "Although the result is much the same, this [the cogency requirement] does not mean that where a serious allegation is in issue the standard of proof required is higher. It means only that the inherent probability or improbability of an event is itself a matter to be taken into account when weighing the probabilities and deciding whether, on balance, the event occurred.
So it may very well be that, in looking at these more recent dicta, one is (as Miss Ball put it) somewhat 'dancing on the head of a pin'; and no counsel has gone so far as to submit to me that, in a serious case such as this, it is now the criminal standard which should in terms be directly applied.
I therefore propose, in applying the civil standard and the re H (Minors)(Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [1996] AC 563…cogency test here, to have well in mind the dicta in the latter two cases just cited. So, whenever in this judgment I 'find' something occurred, or expressed myself 'satisfied' or 'persuaded' of some fact or other, it is in the light of the authorities which I have just been discussing and on the basis that, in this very serious case, the difference between the civil and the criminal standards of proof is 'largely illusory'."
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Re G [2003] EWHC 1711 FD
2003


Children
The mother was addicted to drugs. Whilst the grandmother was in hospital, the authority referred G's case because of concerns at G's development. An order freeing her for adoption was made. The grandmother sought an assessment under s38. Held: The grandmother's appeal failed. Her arguments presumed that she would have been the primary carer not the mother. The judge's order was properly based on the evidence before her.
Children Act 1989 38(6)

 
In re H (Children) [2003] EWCA Civ 369
2003
CA
Thorpe LJ, Ferris J
Children, Human Rights
The maternal grandmother sought permission to intervene in care proceedings to put herself forward as the carer of her young grandchild. The local authority and the guardian objected to the intervention. The judge had refused it. The grandmother appealed. Held: The appeal was allowed. When considering such an application for leave to make an application for a residence order, the statutory checklist must be given its proper respect. It was not appropriate to substitute the test 'has the applicant satisfied the court that he or she has a good arguable case' for the test set out by Parliament in s. 10(9) of the 1989 Act. Thorpe LJ: "The statutory language is transparent. Nowhere does it import any obligation on the judge to carry out independently a review of future prospects." and "I would observe that all that is said directly in relation to the discharge of the judicial task under s. 34(3) and not directly in relation to the discharge of the judicial task under s. 10(9). In my experience, trial judges have interpreted the decision in Re M (Care: Contact: Grandmother's Application for Leave) as requiring them, in the determination of applications under s. 10(9) to apply the three-fold test formulated by Ward LJ which has the laudable purpose of excluding from the litigation exercise applications which are plainly hopeless.
I am particularly anxious at the development of a practice that seems to substitute the test, 'has the applicant satisfied the court that he or she has a good arguable case' for the test that Parliament applied in s. 10(9). That anxiety is heightened in modern times where applicants under s. 10(9) manifestly enjoy Art 6 rights to a fair trial and, in the nature of things, are also likely to enjoy Art 8 rights."
and "The whole purpose of the decision in Re J was to draw the attention of trial judges to the need to adopt a careful review of the section 10(9) criteria and not to replace those tests simply with a broad evaluation of the applicant's future prospects of success."
Children Act 1989 10(9)
1 Citers


 
in Re B (Appeal: Lack of Reasons) [2003] 2 FLR 1035; [2003] EWCA Civ 881
2003
CA
Thorpe LJ
Children
Thorpe LJ considered the standard requirfed of a judgment: "For my part, I would say that the essential test is: does the judgment sufficiently explain what the judge has found and what he has concluded as well as the process of reasoning by which he has arrived at his findings, and then his conclusions?"
1 Citers


 
In re J (Leave to issue application for residence order) [2003] 1 FLR 114
2003


Children
An application was made by a family member (a grandparent) to be joined as a party to care proceedings. Held: A court should not dismiss such an application without proper inquiry.
1 Citers


 
KA v Finland [2003] 1 FLR 696; 27751/95; [2003] ECHR 27; [2003] ECHR 27
14 Jan 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Children
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 8 with regard to taking into care ; No violation of Art. 8 with regard to involvement in decision-making process ; Violation of Art. 8 with regard to failure to promote reunification ; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award
Contracting states have a wide margin of appreciation to determine the necessity of any measures taken in pursuit of the legitimate aim of protecting a child's health and rights, which may vary according to the nature of the issues and interests at stake.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina (R and Others, Minors) v Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service; Regina (P, a Minor) v Same Times, 24 January 2003; Gazette, 20 March 2003
17 Jan 2003
QBD
Charles J
Children, Family
The Act established the respondent (Cafcass) with a duty to provide officers to take appointment as guardian's in proceedings involving children. Complaint was made that they did not provide such officers immediately upon request. Held: The point applied to all situations where the Service was called upon to provide an officer. The argument advanced that Cafcass was under a duty to provide an officer immediately upon notification from the court was not supported in the statute. Immediate appointments were not necessary or efficient. The general rule was that no particular time was implied from the statute. However here Cafcass had agreed that one should be made available as soon as possible given its financial resources.
Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 12

 
Addison and Another (t/a Brayton News) v Ashby Times, 24 January 2003; [2003] UKEAT 0851 - 01 - 1701; [2003] All ER (D) 98; [2003] ICR 667; [2003] IRLR 211
17 Jan 2003
EAT
Burke QC, Dawson and MacArthur
Employment, Children, European
The applicant was a 15 year old paper boy. He sought holiday pay under the regulations. The employer resisted, saying he was not a worker under the regulation, being still in compulsory full time education. Held: No formal system of holidays operated. Children were not explicitly excluded from the Working Time Directive, but were rather dealt with under the Young Persons' Directive. The Working Time Regulations defined two kinds of workers by age, implicitly excluding children in compulsory full time education. The arrangements for such were rather provided by regulations derived from the Young Person's Directive, and which did not include a right to holiday pay.
Working Times Regulations 1998 (1998 No 1833) 2 - Working Time Directive (93/104/EEC) - Young Persons Directive (94/33/EC)5 11 - Children and Young Persons Act 1933 18 30(1) - Children (Protection at Work) Regulations 1998 (1998 No 276)
[ Bailii ]
 
Regester and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service [2003] EWHC 235 (Admin)
17 Jan 2003
Admn

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (CD and ADR) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 27 January 2003; [2003] EWHC 155 (Admin); [2003] 1 FLR 979
17 Jan 2003
QBD
Maurice Kay J
Prisons, Children, Human Rights
The applicant challenged the decision to separate her from her child whilst she was in prison. Held: such a separation engaged her article 8 Human Rights, and she must be allowed representation when a decision was made. The Prison Service should call in appropriate experts in deciding what were the child's needs, the effect of separation, and the proportionality of the intended act to the need.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
R (Children), Re [2003] EWCA Civ 201
4 Feb 2003
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re A [2003] EWCA Civ 210
4 Feb 2003
CA
Hale LJ
Children, Litigation Practice
The court considered whether publicity should be allowed in a children's application: "On the one hand, there is the need to protect the welfare of children. This can arise in a variety of ways. Children can be directly affected by the publication of material about them. If this comes to the notice of their school friends or others, then they may be the subject of jokes, teasing, bullying, and worse. Children, particularly of primary school age, are greatly susceptible to embarrassments of this sort. The other way in which it can be harmful to children is if it serves to undermine the confidence and the ability to cope of the person who is looking after the child."
1 Citers


 
JS v SS for an Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1975
6 Feb 2003
OHCS
Lord Clarke
Scotland, Children

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1975
[ ScotC ]

 
 Re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication); FD 19-Feb-2003 - [2003] EWHC 254 (Fam)
 
In re R (Parental responsibility: IVF baby) [2003] EWCA Civ 182; Gazette, 03 April 2003; [2003] 2 All ER 131; [2003] Fam 129
19 Feb 2003
CA
Sir Andrew Morritt VC, Hale, Dyson LJJ
Family, Children
The mother and father of the child were not married, but had consented to the terms of their infertility treatment. The father donated his sperm, but the mother was only inseminated after they had separated. The mother appealed a declaration of paternity. Held: The Act clearly provided that the embryo was created at the time the fertilised embryo was placed in the womb. The time at issue under the Act was whether the act was 'in the course of treatment services provided for her and a man together'. In this case, at that time, the father and mother were not together, and the biological father was not to be treated as the legal father.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 28(3) - Children Act 1989 4(1)(a) 10(4)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Re R (A Child) [2003] EWCA Civ 182
19 Feb 2003
CA
The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Dyson Lady Justice Hale
Children

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
P v B [2003] EWHC 327 (Fam)
27 Feb 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
An Hospital NHS Trust v S (By her Litigation Friend the Official Solicitor) And D G (S's Father) and S G (S's Mother) [2003] EWHC 365 (Fam)
6 Mar 2003
FD
The President
Health, Children
The hospital sought a declaration that it had no obligation to provide a kidney transplant to an eighteen year old youth who had had very severe disabilities since birth. It was argued that his mental condition meant that he would be unable to cope with the stress and changes involved in the operation. Held: "When considering the best interests of a patient, it is, as is set out in Thorpe LJ's judgment above, the duty of the court to assess the advantages and disadvantages of the various treatments and management options, the viability of each such option and the likely effect each would have on the patient's best interests and . . . his enjoyment of life." The present treatment should continue with further treatments decided upon as necessary, with nothing excluded.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
SH and Another v Suffolk County Council and Another [2003] EWHC 429 (Fam)
7 Mar 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re F (Children) [2003] EWCA Civ 592
18 Mar 2003
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
H Children, Re [2003] EWCA Civ 355
20 Mar 2003
CA

Children

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
[ Bailii ]
 
G and others v Local Authority X; Re G (Care: Challenge to Local Authority's Decision) [2003] EWHC 551 (Fam); [2003] 2 FLR 42
24 Mar 2003
FD
Munby J
Children, Local Government, Human Rights
"procedural fairness is something mandated not merely by Article 6, but also by Article 8."
European Convention on Human Rights 6 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
C v C [2003] EWHC 596 (Fam)
26 Mar 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In the Matter of L (A Child) A Local Authority v MS [2003] EWHC 665 (Fam)
28 Mar 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re M (A Child) [2003] EWCA Civ 601
28 Mar 2003
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]

 
 In re O and N (Minors); In re B (Minors) (Care: Preliminary hearing); HL 3-Apr-2003 - [2003] UKHL 18; Times, 04 April 2003; Gazette, 12 June 2003; [2003] 2 WLR 1075; [2003] 1 FCR 673; [2003] 1 FLR 1169; [2003] Fam Law 464; [2003] 2 All ER 305; [2004] 1 AC 523
 
In re Y and K (Children) [2003] EWCA Civ 669; [2003] 2 FLR 273; [2003] Fam Law 554; [2003] 3 FCR 240
7 Apr 2003
CA

Children

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In re Y and K (Minors) (Split hearing: Evidence) Times, 18 April 2003
7 Apr 2003
CA
Hale, Thorpe LJJ
Children, Evidence
In a 'split trial' procedure under the Act, it was wrong to bring in rules from criminal procedures. A witness who was competent was also compellable. Dicta in In re B were made without reference to section 98.
Children Act 1989 31 98
1 Cites


 
W, Regina (on the Application Of) v Oxfordshire County Council [2003] EWHC 953 (Admin)
15 Apr 2003
Admn

Children, Health, Local Government

[ Bailii ]
 
In re M (Care Proceedings: Judicial Review); In the matter of unborn baby M R; X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire County Council [2003] 2 FLR 171; [2003] EWHC 850 (Admin)
15 Apr 2003
Admn
Munby J
Children, Judicial Review
Munby J said: "If a baby is to be removed from its mother, one would normally expect arrangements to be made by the local authority to facilitate contact on a regular basis . . Those arrangements must be driven by the needs of the family, not stunted by lack of resources. Typically, if this is what the parents want, one will be looking to contact most days of the week and for lengthy periods."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Sylvester v Austria (2003) 37 EHRR 417; [2003] 2 FLR 210; [2003] ECHR 196; 36812/97; 40104/98; (2003) 37 EHRR 17
24 Apr 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Children
Effective respect for family life required that future family relations between parent and child are not determined by the passage of time alone
European Convention on Human Rights
1 Citers

[ Worldlii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
In re J (a Child) (Care Proceedings: Disclosure) Times, 16 May 2003; Gazette, 14 August 2003
9 May 2003
FD
Wall J
Children, Local Government, Information
A report had been prepared by the local authority into the way in which it had handled the proceedings. The guardian sought to inspect the report and the authority resisted, claiming public interest immunity. Held: The report had been prepared in connection with the matters underlying the proceedings. By virtue of the Act, the child's guardian had the right to inspect all such documents irrespective of any rule of law or enactment otherwise preventing disclosure. The child had been removed from the home and medically examined, but the mother had not been given the true reasons for the action. Later, before the guardian was appointed, the authority also misled the court. An order for disclosure had been made by the magistrates court, but resisted by the authority. Questions of Public Interest Immunity simply did not arise. Confidentiality would not be lost by disclosure to the guardian.
Children Act 1989 42(3)
1 Cites


 
A Metropolitan Borough Council v JJ and Another [2003] EWHC 976 (Fam)
9 May 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re A (Children) (Care proceedings: Asylum seekers) Times, 26 May 2003
16 May 2003
FD
Munby J
Immigration, Children
In the course of care proceedings, it had become apparent that the sole purpose in their continuance by the parents was not that the children were at any real or substantial risk of harm, but rather that their continuance influenced the parents' ability to stay within the UK. There was no evidence of any risk to the children from being returned to their home country, and a continuance of the proceedings would be an abuse of process.

 
Rotherham Borough Council v M and others [2003] EWHC 1086 (Fam)
16 May 2003
FD
Munby J
Children, Immigration

[ Bailii ]
 
White v White [2003] EWCA Civ 924
19 May 2003
CA
Lord Justice Thorpe, Lady Justice Arden, Mr Justice Bodey
Family, Trusts, Children, Land
The parties to the marriage owned a property which they had extended. The relationship deteriorated, and the mother sought an order under the 1996 Act. The mother left the home, and the father cared for the children. He sought orders under the 1989 Act for the transfer of the property. Those proceedings were made subject to the current proceedings. Held: Sensible case management demands that competing applications be conjoined. The current order was wrong in principle. When the court looked at the intentions of the parties under a trust, it should look to the time before the trust, not from time to time later. The powers under each Act are not co-extensive. Unless for some special reason the application should be under both Acts and the exercise of the powers under each Act should be considered by the same court and at the same time.
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14 - Children Act 1989 Sch1
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In re B (Childen: Patient Confidentiality) Times, 01 July 2003
21 May 2003
CA
Thorpe, LJ, Bodey J
Children, Health Professions
A pyschiatrist treating a child was given information under the cloak of professional privilege, to suggest there had been abuse. She had reported her concerns to the child protection services, and gone on to make a statement. Held: A health professional in such circumstances may well be correct to break confidentialty but must recognise that if she goes beyond reporting her concerns to making a statement, she cannot then object to being called as witness if that evidence is used.

 
In re B (Children) [2003] EWCA Civ 786
21 May 2003
CA

Children
Admission and use of consultant psychologist's evidence in child sexual abuse allegation.
[ Bailii ]
 
C v Balham Youth Court [2003] EWHC 1332 (Admin)
22 May 2003
Admn
Scott Baker LJ
Criminal Sentencing, Children
The court discussed sentencing practice on very young offenders: "The fact than an offender … does not qualify for a detention and training order because he is only 14 and not a persistent offender is not an exceptional circumstance to justify passing a sentence of less than two years under section 91 of the 2000 Act." The relevant question was whether it was such a serious case that detention above two years would or might realistically be required. Two 14 year olds attempted to rob another 14 year old and no weapons were used, although one was threatened. The court found it inappropriate to think in terms of two years or more.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Petition of KAT for an Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
22 May 2003
SCS
Lord McEwan
Scotland, Children

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
[ ScotC ]
 
M, Regina (on the Application Of) v Islington and Another [2003] EWHC 1388 (Admin)
5 Jun 2003
Admn

Immigration, Housing, Children

[ Bailii ]
 
PW v AL Or W for an Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
12 Jun 2003
SCS
Lord President and Lady Cosgrove and Lord Johnston
Scotland, Children

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
[ ScotC ]
 
A and D v B and E [2003] EWHC 1376 (Fam)
13 Jun 2003
FD
The Honourable Mr Justice Sumner
Children, Health, Civil Procedure Rules
In two separate actions, fathers with parental responsibility sought orders requiring the mothers of their children to ensure they received the MMR vaccine. Each mother objected, having suspicions as to the safety of the treatment. Specific issue orders were sought. Held: The court found the evidence given by the expert for the mother's unconvincing. There was no evidence of a medical reason for the children not to be immunised. Though part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules did not apply directly in family proceedings, experts should follow the principles laid down. The interests of the child were paramount, and the decision made according to their best interests. immunisation is in these children’s best interests. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights giving respect to private and family life is considered. There is an exception permitting the interference by the court for the protection of health.
Children Act 1989 1 8 - Civil Procedure Rules P35
1 Cites


 
A and D v B and E [2003] EWHC 1376 (Fam)
13 Jun 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental Rights); In re F (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights) Times, 26 June 2003; Gazette, 14 August 2003
13 Jun 2003
FD
Sumner J
Children, Health, Human Rights
In each case fathers not married to the mother of the child, but with parental responsibility sought to have the child immunised. The mothers opposed the treatment saying they believed it unsafe. Held: The children should be immunised. Article 8.2 permitted interference with family life for health reasons. Mothers and fathers had equal rights before the court, and the court should be reluctant to intervene. The medical evidence was clear and persuasive. Acknowledging the mothers fears, age appropriate vaccination was in the child's best interests. This was not a general approval of immunisation for children.
Children Act 1989 8 - European Convention on Human Rights 8.2
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
C v C [2003] EWCA Civ 928
17 Jun 2003
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
E C and M C v Alan D Miller, Principal Reporter, Scottish Children's Reporter Administration
26 Jun 2003
IHCS
Lord Osborne and Lord Hamilton and Lord Carloway
Scotland, Children

Children (Scotland) Act 1995
[ ScotC ]
 
In re A (a Child) (Care proceedings: Non-accidental injury) Times, 22 August 2003; Gazette, 18 September 2003
1 Jul 2003
CA

Children
The 11 year old child had been subject to non-accidental injury. The perpetrator could not be identified form among those who had care of him. The Family Court had held the first part of a split trial. The judge had been unable to exclude the immediate family and carers from the pool of possible perpetratrors. Held: Where there was not sufficient evidence to make a finding as to the perpetrator the test was that of a real possibility that one or more individuals with access might have caused the injury. The test of 'no possibility' was too wide. Here the night nanny and maternal grandmother were clear of any such real possibility. The case showed the difficulty often of having split trials.
Children Act 1989 31
1 Cites


 
North Yorkshire County Council v SA and others [2003] EWCA Civ 839; [2003] 2 FLR 849; [2003] 3 FCR 118
1 Jul 2003
CA
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P
Children
The child was taken to hospital with injuries which the doctors concluded were non-accidental. The identity of the abuser was in doubt. Held: The court set out to identify the procedures in cases involving suspected non-accidental injuries where there was insufficient identification of the abuser. There are two parts to the threshold test, the harm or likelihood of harm and the attributable condition. 'the court has . . to recognise and have regard to the differing interests of the adults and the child, Parliament has provided a two limb threshold which requires to be satisfied before the court has the right to consider the welfare of the child. The first is [that] the child was injured and suffered significant harm. In relation to the second limb, the attributable condition, it seems to me that the two most likely outcomes in 'uncertain perpetrator' cases are as follows. The first is that there is sufficient evidence for the court positively to identify the perpetrator or perpetrators. Second, if there is not sufficient evidence to make such a finding, the court has to apply the test set out by Lord Nicholls as to whether there is a real possibility or likelihood that one or more of a number of people with access to the child might have caused the injury to the child. For this purpose, real possibility and likelihood can be treated as the same test. ' The appeal was allowed.
Children Act 1989 31
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Jones Times, 13 August 2003; Gazette, 18 September 2003
2 Jul 2003
FD
Elizabeth Butler-Sloss President
Children, Child Support
The appellant Secretary of State challenged a decision of magistrates as to whether the respondent was the father of a child for whom Child Support was sought. The mother had been married, but had been living with the respondent at the appropriate time. The respondent had refused to provide a DNA sample for testing. The magistrates applied the presumption that a child born in wedlock was the child of the husband. Held: The magistrates had erred in law. The presumption which followed a refusal to provide a sample was virtually inescapable, and should be given greater weight than the presumption of legitimacy. The result, if the magistrates had been correct, was that a child could never obtain a declaration of paternity, which would impact upon the child's right to family life.
Family Law Act 1986
1 Cites


 
In re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) Times, 21 July 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 963; Gazette, 11 September 2003; [2003] 2 FLR 1253; [2003] 3 WLR 1425
10 Jul 2003
CA
Lady Justice Hale (dissenting), Lord Justice Latham Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr
Children, Media, Human Rights
An order was sought to protect from publicity a child whose mother faced trial for the murder of his brother. The child was now in care. Held: The court must balance the need to protect the child with the need for freedom of the press. The issue in the case was not itself about the care of this child, and therefore the child's interests were not paramount. The court had three jurisdiction as identified in Kelly. The welfare of the child could affect determination of factual issues. The court was not, in this case, exercising any jursidiction over the care of the child. The authorities had not been all one way, and the court was being asked to exercise a new jurisdiction. Although nothing would be published directly about the child, this was not a case where his connection was distant enough to preserve his identity from being known. On the other side of the balance was the need at common law and in human rights law, for freedom of speech and of the press. The High Court has jurisdiction to make orders binding on a criminal court, but these powers could be exercised only sparingly. Lady Hale's analysis of the law was accepted by the other judge's but they differed as to the conclusion in this case and the judge's order declining to make an order to protect the child's identity was upheld.
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
S (A Child), Re [2003] EWCA Civ 963
10 Jul 2003
CA
Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Lady Justice Hale And Lord Justice Latham
Children, Media, Human Rights
The mother of the child on behalf of whom the application was made, was to face trial for murder. The child was in care and an order was sought to restrain publiction of material which might reveal his identity, including matters arising during the trial. Held: (Hale LJ dissenting) The court in this case was not making a decision which involved the child's upbringing, and nor was the child directly involved in the case at issue. The court was being invited to exercise its protective jurisdiction. It is not a case in which the child's interests were by law paramount, as against the interests of freedom of the press.
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39 - European Convention on Human Rights 6 8 10
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 In re W (Children) (Care proceedings: Disclosure); FD 11-Jul-2003 - Times, 21 July 2003; Gazette, 18 September 2003
 
Local Authority v W and others [2003] EWHC 1624 (Fam)
11 Jul 2003
FD

Children, Local Government

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina (B) v Merton London Borough Council; Admn 14-Jul-2003 - [2003] EWHC 1689 (Admin); Times, 18 July 2003; [2003] 4 All ER 280
 
Glasgow City Council v DH and Another [2003] ScotCS 202; 2003 SCLR 742
17 Jul 2003
IHCS
Lord President Lady Cosgrove Lord Cameron of Lochbroom
Children
Exclusion orders had been sought under the Act, but refused for non-compliance with procedures under the Act. New applications were made to different courts, and the applicant said it was not open to the Authorities to make the same application again after it had been once refused. Held: The procedure did not allow an appeal. In the circumstances, the renewed applications were not an abuse of process. An order is not concerned with achieving a permanent determination of rights and duties but with securing the protection of vulnerable persons in the light of information and advice which may change from time to time. Furthermore, the existence of time-limits for such orders, including at an interim stage, may make it difficult, if not impossible, for the same application to be kept in being until its final determination. Hence the need for a fresh application, which may or may not include additional supporting material.
Children (Scotland) Act 1995 76 77 78 79 80
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
In re H (a Minor) (Child abduction: Mother's Asylum) Times, 08 August 2003
25 Jul 2003
FD
Wilson J
Children, Immigration
The mother fled Pakistan and secured asylum here, proving a well founded fear of persecution if she returned. She had brought her son. The father applied for the child to be returned for the courts there to decide his future, saying he had been abducted. Held: To order the return of the child anticipating the mother could pursue her claim in Pakistan anticipated her being required to return to the country where she had been found to have a proper fear of persecution. The father offered undertakings which it was concluded could provide adequate protection to the mother. Pakistan was not party to the 1980 Convention. The child's welfare was paramount. The 1980 Convention provided that the optimum programme for the child should be determined from his history, that a decision should be made without reference to a unilateral relocation by one parent, and the duty where tow jurisdictaions may be in conflict for one to cede jurisdiction quickly. In a difficult balancing exercise, the undertakings would make it possible for the wife to plead her case in Pakistan, and the child should be returned.
Children Act 1989 1 - Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 (Cmnd 8281) - Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 P-1 - Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 (Cmd 9171)

 
In re G (a Child) (Litigants in Person) [2003] EWCA Civ 1055; Times, 31 July 2003; [2003] 2 FLR 963
28 Jul 2003
CA
Elizabeth Butler-Sloss Dame, Thorpe, Rix LJJ
Children
The father of a child involved in a case before the court was acting in person. He wanted to seek advice from the Citizen's Advice Bureau or the RCJ Personal Support Unit. Held: The rules needed to be reconsidered so that a litigant in person need not each time apply to the court before disclosing papers in his case to the service providing support to such litigants. Until the rules were altered, there was no objection to a party disclosing to such services non-identifiable information for their advice.
Family Proceedings 1991 (1991 1247) 4.23
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In re B (Children) (Removal from jurisdiction); In re S (Child) (Removal from jurisdiction) [2003] EWCA Civ 1149; Times, 29 August 2003
30 Jul 2003
CA
Thorpe, Judge, Sedley LLJ
Children, International
Mothers appealed refusal of leave to remove their children from the jurisdiction so that they could make a life with a new partner. Held: The case of Payne was not directly of effect, because the mother there was returning to her home country. It did show the need to see where the new family would naturally live. The degree of attachment and commitment of the new partners was a factor which could be decisive. It was not a question of putting the mother's interests before the child but of recognising that if the child was to be with the mother and if the mother's life would take her abroad, the child should follow in reality. To act otherwise would unduly restrict proper migration.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights); In re F (a Child) (Imminisation: Parental rights) Times, 15 August 2003
30 Jul 2003
CA
Thorpe, Sedley LJJ, Sir Anthony Evans
Children, Health
In two actions heard together, single mothers resisted attempts to have their children immunised at the behest of the fathers, who in each case had parental responsibility. Held: A one-parent carer did not have the freedom to make such a choice when the other parent sought that the child should be immunised. Doctors had provided expert evidence in support of the advisability of immunisations, and the judge had considered the various treatments in turn. Disputes on the value and safety of such treatments ought not to be decided at the behest of one of the two parents in the absence of agreement. Immunisation was not an invasive treatment, and 'In re J' did not support the mothers' cases. It was rather preventive health care, and it was the duty of the State to promote it. The witness employed by the mothers had used junk science, and their case was against the weight of the evidence.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
B (A Child); Re C (Welfare of Child: Immunisation) [2003] EWCA Civ 1148; [2003] 73 BMLR 152; [2003] 2 FLR 1095; [2003] 2 FCR 156
30 Jul 2003
CA
Thorpe LJ, Sedley LJ, Sir Anthony Evans
Children, Health
The father sought a specific issue order for the immunisation of his child in particular with the MMR vaccine. The mother opposed all immunisation. Held: Whether a child was to be refused immunisation was an issue on which both parents should be involved. "the present case is seen not as some significant novelty requiring guidance from this court but as a standard section 8 application which has attracted a great deal of publicity." It is not a general requirement of section 8 applications that expert evience must be brought. The judge's assessment of the evidence given was conscientious and comprehensive, and the applications had been decided by applying the paramount consideration of the welfare of the two children concerned. "Not to mince words, the court below was presented with junk science. " The appeal failed.
Children Act 1989 8
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
GA v London Borough of Southwark and others [2003] 2011 (Fam)
4 Aug 2003
FD

Children

Children Act 1989
[ Bailii ]
 
In re O and Another (Children: Care proceedings evidence) Times, 26 September 2003; Gazette, 16 October 2003
14 Aug 2003
FD
Johnson J
Evidence, Children
The mother had refused to give evidence at the hearing in care proceedings, to answer allegations made against her. She appealed a decision against her. Held: In cases involving the care of children, there is no place for the 'no comment' interview which was part and parcel of criminal procedure. Though parents might understandably feel that there was an adversarial feel, the objective was protection of children not punishment. Accordingly the court must almost inevitably draw inferences against a parent who refused to submit herself to cross examination.

 
Regina (Behre and Others) v Hillingdon London Borough Council Times, 22 September 2003; Gazette, 16 October 2003
29 Aug 2003
QBD
Sullivan J
Local Government, Immigration, Children
Each claimant arrived as an unaccompanied child to claim asylum, and destitute. Assistance was provided under the 1989 Act until they were 18. They claimed a duty under the 200 Act to continue to assist them. Held: Under the 2000 Act a duty was owed to a 'former relevant child' - a person who had been looked after by the local authority for 13 weeks before attaining 18 and was eligible at that time. 'Looked after' included having had accommodation provided. Exceptions were spelt out in the Regulations, and there was no need to add a gloss to the combined definition. It did no disservice to the definition to count the applicants as former relevant children, and the duty to assist applied to them.
Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000 2 - Children Act 1989 19B(2) 23C(1) - Children (Leaving Care) (England) Regulations) 2000 (200 No 2874)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Berhe and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Hillingdon and Another [2003] EWHC 2075 (Admin)
29 Aug 2003
Admn

Immigration, Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re M [2003] ScotSC 49
9 Sep 2003
ScSf

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
K (A Child), Re [2003] EWCA Civ 1410
16 Sep 2003
CA

Costs, Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Sophia Gudrun Hansen v Turkey 36141/97; [2004] 1 FLR 142; [2003] ECHR 451; [2003] ECHR 451
23 Sep 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Children
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Pecuniary damage - financial award ; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings ; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
"Although measures against children obliging them to re-unite with one or other parent are not desirable in this sensitive area, such action must not be ruled out in the event of non-compliance or unlawful behaviour by the parent with whom the children live."
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
L1 and Another, Re Care Proceedings [2003] NIFam 12
16 Oct 2003
FDNI

Children

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v G and R; HL 16-Oct-2003 - [2003] UKHL 50; Times, 17 October 2003; Gazette, 13 November 2003; [2003] 3 WLR 1060; [2004] 1 AC 1034; (2003) 167 JP 621; (2003) 167 JPN 955; [2004] 1 Cr App R 21; [2003] 4 All ER 765

 
 Regina v London Borough of Barnet ex parte G; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte W; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte A; HL 23-Oct-2003 - [2003] 3 WLR 1194; Times, 24 October 2003; [2003] UKHL 57; [2004] 2 AC 208
 
G (Children), Re [2003] EWCA Civ 1607
11 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Tuckey
Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re G (Children) (Foreign contact order: Enforcement) Times, 19 November 2003; Gazette, 08 January 2004; Gazette, 15 January 2004
11 Nov 2003
CA
Thorpe, Potter, Tuckey LJJ
Children, European
The father sought to have registered here, a French order for parental contact. The mother had brought the child to England with the consent of the court, and then obtained an apparently conflicting order here. Held: There was a conflict between the Regulation and the Convention as scheduled to the 1985 Act. The London order had been expressly set out in order to allow the gradual bringing into effect of the French order, and so did not conflict with it. Access orders cannot be treated as having been written in stone, and enforcement after some time and in different circumstances may be problematic. The Regulation prevailed over the Act. When the mother became resident in England, the French court ceased to have exclusive jurisdiction. The judge was correct to order the registration of the father's order here and to make his own order. Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed.
Council Regulation EC/1347/2000 - Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985

 
P-B (A Child), Re [2003] EWCA Civ 1827
11 Nov 2003
CA

Children
Renewed application despite earlier order that no application should be made
Children Act 1989 81(14)
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (S) v Haringey London Borough Council Times, 27 November 2003; Gazette, 08 January 2004
13 Nov 2003
QBD
Munby J
Children
The applicant sought a writ of habeas corpus in respect of her four children who had been removed by the police, and were residing with the local authority under interim care orders. She said they were held against their wills. Held: The proper forum for such a challenges is the care proceedings, and the administrative court should not intervene. Since in any event the children were not held securely, but were living with foster parents, they were not being detained, and habeas corpus was inappropriate.
1 Cites


 
H (Child), Re (Care Order: Appropriate Local Authority) [2003] EWCA Civ 1629; Times, 26 November 2003; Gazette, 15 January 2004
18 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Dyson
Children, Local Government
The court had to decide to which of two local authorities, responsibility for supervising a care order should be assigned. The child had moved to live with his grandparents. Held: The judge had been correct to find that family circumstances might justify not following the rules in Northamptonshire and Plymouth, but the case was not sufficiently exceptional on that ground. However, the child here could properly be said to have been resident with the grandparents, and the order assigning responsibility to the authority where they lived was appropriate.
Children Act 1989 105(6)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
O, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Haringey and Another [2003] EWHC 2798 (Admin)
25 Nov 2003
Admn

Children, Housing, Immigration

[ Bailii ]

 
 In re a local authority (Inquiry: restraint on publication); A Local Authority v A Health Authority and A; FD 27-Nov-2003 - [2003] EWHC Fam 2746; Times, 05 December 2003; Gazette, 22 January 2004; [2004] EWHC 2746 (Fam); [2004] Fam 96; [2004] Fam Law 179; [2004] 1 FCR 113; [2004] 1 All ER 480; [2004] 2 WLR 926; (2004) 7 CCL Rep 426; (2004) 76 BMLR 210; [2004] BLGR 117; [2004] 1 FLR 541
 
A v L [2003] EWHC 2911 (Fam)
2 Dec 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re A (a Child) (Foreign contact order: Jurisdiction) Times, 10 December 2003; Gazette, 22 January 2004
2 Dec 2003
FD
Sumner J
Children, Jurisdiction
A Spanish court had given the mother permission to remove the child to England and for contact. That order had been made final in Spain. The father now sought here to amend it, and to enforce the contact element. Held: The Spanish proceedings had been concluded by the rejection of the father's appeal in Spain. The convention allowed that further proceddings might be appropriate where children are concerned. However the father could still apply to enforce the order here or to apply within the UK's own jurisdiction.

 
Re Angela Roddy (a child) (identification: restriction on publication), Torbay Borough Council v News Group Newspapers [2003] EWHC 2927 (Fam); [2004] 1 FCR 30; [2004] 2 FLR 949; [2004] EMLR 8
2 Dec 2003
FD
Munby J
Children, Media, Human Rights
A twelve year old girl had become pregnant. The Catholic Church was said to have paid her not to have an abortion. After the birth she and her baby were taken into care. The authority proposed the adoption of the baby. There was more publicity. Angela Roddy said that she had 'Gillick capacity' and that her views were therefore determinative notwithstanding that in law she was still a child. Held: Munby J said: "Angela, in my judgment, is of an age, and has sufficient understanding and maturity, to decide for herself whether that which is private, personal and intimate should remain private or whether it should be shared with the whole world. The decision is for Angela: it is not for her parents, the local authority or the court." and
"Article 8 embraces both the right to maintain one’s privacy and, if this is what one prefers, not merely the right to waive that privacy but also the right to share what would otherwise be private with others or, indeed, with the world at large. So the right to communicate one’s story to one’s fellow beings is protected not merely by Article 10 but also by Article 8." and "A child is, of course, as much entitled to the protection of the European Convention - and specifically of Arts 8 and 10 - as anyone else. But . . the personal autonomy guaranteed by Art 8 (and, I would add, by Art 10) is necessarily somewhat qualified in the case of a child. For, depending on the circumstances, decision-making power may rest not with the child but with the child's parents or even with the court."
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
London Borough of Redbridge v Newport City Council and others [2003] EWHC 2967 (Fam)
4 Dec 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Kenny, Regina (on the Application of) v Leeds Magistrates Court, Leeds City Council [2003] EWHC 2963 (Admin); [2004] 1 All ER 1333
5 Dec 2003
Admn
Owen J
Crime, Children, Human Rights
In cases involving children, Article 3 provides that the best interests of the child are a primary consideration, not the primary consideration.
The court looked at the test for making an interim ASBO: "Consideration of whether it is just to make an order without notice is necessarily a balancing exercise. The court must balance the need to protect the public against the impact that the order sought will have upon the defendant. It will need to consider the seriousness of the behaviour in issue, the urgency with which it is necessary to take steps to control such behaviour, and whether it is necessary for orders to be made without notice in order for them to be effective. On the other side of the equation it will consider the degree to which the order will impede the defendant's rights as a free citizen to go where he pleases and to associate with whosoever he pleases.
It is submitted on behalf of the Claimants that such relief can only be granted in exceptional circumstances, and that there must be compelling urgency to justify an application without notice. In my judgment that would be an unwarranted and unnecessary gloss upon the test set out in section 1D. But it is implicit in the balancing exercise that the considerations that weigh in favour of injunctive relief must be sufficiently serious to warrant what may amount to a serious interference with the civil rights of a defendant."
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 1D - European Convention on Human Rights 3
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
H v Balham Youth Court and Another [2003] EWHC 3267 (Admin)
10 Dec 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re C (Hague Convention Application: Interim Powers) [2003] EWHC 3065 (Fam)
12 Dec 2003
FD

Children
Power of court to make interim order for local authority to safeguard welfare of a child subject to an application under the Act.
Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
[ Bailii ]
 
The Father v The Mother, O by Cafcass Legal; In re O (a Child) (Contact: Withdrawal of application) [2003] EWHC 3031 (Fam); Times, 13 January 2004
12 Dec 2003
FD
Mr Justice Wall
Children
The father sought to withdraw his application for contact, but the court took the opportunity to explain some points relating to contact disputes. Held: Such disputes engender very deep feelings. Courts must ensure contact with both parents save when absolutely necessary. Joint residence order should be more widespread, but they were not the default order. The court's consent was required to withdraw such an application. It is not the courts who decide to hear children cases in private, but a matter for statute. Publicity would be very damaging for the child. The father had failed to understand the part his own behaviour played in the continuation and aggravation of the child's problems. Parental alienation cases did exist, but this was not one.
Family Proceedings Rules 1991 4.5(1) - Children Act 1989 97(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Palau Martinez v France 64927/01; [2003] ECHR 688; [2003] ECHR 693; (2005) 41 EHRR 9; [2004] 2 FLR 810
16 Dec 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Children
A decision of the French court that the children should live with their father, and not with their Jehovah's Witness mother, was based decisively on its view of the mother's religious practices and was discriminatory; although the protection of the children was a legitimate aim, there was, in the view of the Strasbourg court, no reasonably proportionate relationship between the means employed and the legitimate aim being pursued.
European Convention on Human Rights
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
A v A [2003] EWHC 3102 (Fam)
16 Dec 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
A County Council v Y and Another [2003] EWHC 3090 (Fam)
17 Dec 2003
FD
Holman J
Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re M (A Minor) (Care Order: Simultaneous Application for Freeing Order) Gazette, 05 February 2004; [2003] EWCA Civ 1874
18 Dec 2003
CA
Lords Justice Ward, Mantell and Carnwath
Adoption, Children
The local authority sought both a care order and a freeing order. Held: The applications ought to be treated as two separate applications.

 
M (A Child), Re [2003] EWCA Civ 1874
18 Dec 2003
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re M (a Minor) (Care order: Freeing Application) Times, 02 January 2004
18 Dec 2003
CA
Ward, Carnwath LJJ
Adoption, Children
Where a local authority sought both a care order and an order freeing the child for adoption, the court must be careful to distinguish between the applications. The care application should be dealt with first.
1 Cites


 
C v C [2003] EWHC 3164 (Fam)
18 Dec 2003
FD

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
K v K [2003] EWHC 3178 (Fam)
19 Dec 2003
FD
Sumner J
Children

[ Bailii ]
 
W, Regina (on the Application of) v Essex County Council [2003] EWHC 3175 (Admin)
19 Dec 2003
Admn

Children, Local Government

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.