Click the case name for better results:

Re C (Children Appeal): FC 30 May 2014

Application by the father for permission to appeal as to whether care orders in respect of the children should be discharged with the result the children could return to live with their father; whether the section 34(4) order should be discharged so that the children could have direct contact with their father; and thirdly, whether … Continue reading Re C (Children Appeal): FC 30 May 2014

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

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

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

Greater Manchester Chief Constable v KI and Another (Children) and others: FD 26 Jul 2007

Originating summons in the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court asking for an order granting permission to interview two young girls, represented by CAFCASS Legal. The third defendant is the children’s mother, NP. The local authority in which the children and their mother reside, Manchester City Council, has also been represented as an interested party. … Continue reading Greater Manchester Chief Constable v KI and Another (Children) and others: FD 26 Jul 2007

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

In Re L (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re V (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re M (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re H (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In re L, V, M and H (Children): CA 21 Jun 2000

When considering contact applications after domestic violence, the approach should be child centred, and according to the criteria in the Act. The circumstances of the violence should be looked into, and the potentially damaging effect of contact with a violent parent should not be underestimated. The parent’s possible contribution to the child and facing up … Continue reading In Re L (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re V (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re M (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re H (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In re L, V, M and H (Children): CA 21 Jun 2000

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

Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003

The court considered whether discriminatory acts after the termination of employment were caught by the respective anti-discrimination Acts. The acts included a failure to give proper references. They pursued claims on the basis of victimisation after their primary discrimination claims. Held: The 1975 and 1976 Acts were similarly phrased and the wording in the 1995 … Continue reading Relaxion Group plc v Rhys-Harper; D’Souza v London Borough of Lambeth; Jones v 3M Healthcare Limited and three other actions: HL 19 Jun 2003

In re W (Children) (Family proceedings: Evidence) (Abuse: Oral Evidence): SC 3 Mar 2010

The court considered the approach to be taken when considering whether to order a child’s attendance at court in care proceedings. It was argued that the starting point of assuming that a child should not attend, failed to respect the human right to a fair trial of all concerned. Held: The existing law erects a … Continue reading In re W (Children) (Family proceedings: Evidence) (Abuse: Oral Evidence): SC 3 Mar 2010

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

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

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

In Re D v D (Children) (Shared Residence Orders): CA 20 Nov 2000

Three children, after their parents’ separation, spent substantial amounts of time with each, despite the acrimony between their parents and frequent court applications. The father argued that without a shared residence order he was treated as a second-class parent by authorities with whom he had to deal over matters relating to the children. The judge … Continue reading In Re D v D (Children) (Shared Residence Orders): CA 20 Nov 2000

Soering v The United Kingdom: ECHR 7 Jul 1989

(Plenary Court) The applicant was held in prison in the UK, pending extradition to the US to face allegations of murder, for which he faced the risk of the death sentence, which would be unlawful in the UK. If extradited, a representation would be made to the judge at the time of sentencing that the … Continue reading Soering v The United Kingdom: ECHR 7 Jul 1989

Lauritzen A/A v Wijsmuller BV;( ‘The Super Servant Two’): CA 12 Oct 1989

Bingham LJ discussed the nature of frustration of contract: ‘The essence of frustration is that it is caused by some unforeseen supervening event over which the parties to the contract have no control and for which they are therefore not responsible. To say that the supervening event occurs without the default or blame or responsibility … Continue reading Lauritzen A/A v Wijsmuller BV;( ‘The Super Servant Two’): CA 12 Oct 1989

Y (Children In Care: Change of Nationality): CA 6 Aug 2020

Proceedings for LA to change child’s nationality Two children taken into care were of Indian nationality, though born in the UK. The LA wanted to apply for UK nationality so as to regularise their immigration status. The parents objected. The parents now appealed from rejection of their requests for the discharge of the long standing … Continue reading Y (Children In Care: Change of Nationality): CA 6 Aug 2020

Blankley v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Trust: CA 27 Jan 2015

This case concerns a claimant with fluctuating capacity to conduct legal proceedings. At a time when she had capacity, she retained a firm of solicitors under a conditional fee agreement. The issue was whether the CFA terminated automatically by reason of frustration when she subsequently lost capacity, so that it did not govern the continued … Continue reading Blankley v Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Trust: CA 27 Jan 2015

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

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

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