Search Results for: Children Act 1989 94

Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Norfolk County Council, ex parte M: QBD 1989

The plaintiff worked as a plumber. His work took him to a private children’s home. An allegation of sexual abuse was made against him by a 13 year old child. She had made other claims against other men which had proved to be false. He was released by the police without charge. The local authority … Continue reading Regina v Norfolk County Council, ex parte M: QBD 1989

In Re A (A Minor) (Supervision Order: Extension): CA 11 Nov 1994

Justices do not have the power to make an interim care order pending a later hearing on the extension of an existing supervision order. Citations: Times 11-Nov-1994, [1995] 1 FLR 335 Statutes: Children Act 1989 31 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Applied – T (A Child) v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council CA 19-Mar-2008 A … Continue reading In Re A (A Minor) (Supervision Order: Extension): CA 11 Nov 1994

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

Bowden and Another v Lancashire County Council: CA 18 Jun 1994

The council had made an ex parte application to the magistrates to cancel the appellant’s registration as a child minder. Held: The court affirmed the order setting aside the magistrates decision. The circumstances which the council put before the justices did not constitute an emergency sufficient to justify a summary order without notice under section … Continue reading Bowden and Another v Lancashire County Council: CA 18 Jun 1994

Dobbie v Medway Health Authority: CA 11 May 1994

The plaintiff had a lump on her breast. The surgeon, without first subjecting the lump to a microscopic examination in order to determine whether it was cancerous or benign, removed the breast. This was in 1973. The lump was subsequently found to be benign. The patient knew very soon after the operation that the lump … Continue reading Dobbie v Medway Health Authority: CA 11 May 1994

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

Sutton London Borough Council v Davis (Number 2): FD 8 Jul 1994

The local authority had refused to register a childminder, who successfully appealed to the magistrates, who awarded costs in her favour. The local authority appealed against the costs order. In doing so the authority urged the court to apply, by analogy, the principle that costs are not usually ordered in child cases. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Sutton London Borough Council v Davis (Number 2): FD 8 Jul 1994

In re H (Children) (Contact Order) ( No 2): FD 22 Jun 2001

Exceptional circumstances might exist such that the need to protect a child’s primary carer would require the court to safeguard that at the expense of the immediate consideration of the welfare of the children. Here, contact had been established after the separation, but the father suffered a degenerative disease, and threatened his own suicide, and … Continue reading In re H (Children) (Contact Order) ( No 2): FD 22 Jun 2001

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

A v A (Children: Shared Residence Order): CA 3 Feb 1994

A shared residence order may be still made if it is needed, but it remains an unusual order. Connell J discussed the guidance given as to shared residence orderButler-Sloss LJ said: ‘Miss Moulder, representing the father, accepts that the conventional order still is that there would be residence to one parent with contact to the … Continue reading A v A (Children: Shared Residence Order): CA 3 Feb 1994

Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947

Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal procedure, and the applicant sought a … Continue reading Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947

Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council v E and Others: CA 16 Mar 1994

The judge need not decide on the outcome of a residence order application before going on to consider a care order. There was no necessary order of consideration. A care order should not normally be made to Local Authority if a capable family member will take child. Citations: Independent 13-Apr-1994, Times 16-Mar-1994, [1994] 1 FLR … Continue reading Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council v E and Others: CA 16 Mar 1994

Re M (A Minor): FD 12 Dec 1994

The welfare of the child is not the paramount consideration on an application for child to be remanded to secure accommodation by Local Authority. Citations: Ind Summary 12-Dec-1994 Statutes: Children Act 1989 1 25 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Children Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.85817

Re M (A Minor) (Care Orders: Threshold Conditions): HL 7 Jun 1994

The father had been sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of the child’s mother. Application was made for the child to be made subject to a care order. The father appealed refusal of an order. Held: When an application was made on the basis that a child was suffering significant harm after making interim … Continue reading Re M (A Minor) (Care Orders: Threshold Conditions): HL 7 Jun 1994

In Re M (A Minor) (Secure Accommodation Order): CA 15 Nov 1994

On making a secure accommodation order, the welfare of the child is a relevant but not the paramount consideration. The Court referred to the responsibility of reaching ‘so serious and Draconian a decision as the restriction upon the liberty of the child’. Citations: Times 15-Nov-1994, [1995] 1 FLR 418 Statutes: Children Act 1989 25 Jurisdiction: … Continue reading In Re M (A Minor) (Secure Accommodation Order): CA 15 Nov 1994

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

Regina v Northavon District Council ex parte Smith: HL 18 Jul 1994

Local Authority is under no obligation to provide permanent housing for a family with children save as provided under the Act. The Children Act not to be used as a way around homelessness decisions and rules. A Social Services request to house children did not revive any claim made on behalf of the family as … Continue reading Regina v Northavon District Council ex parte Smith: HL 18 Jul 1994

In Re P (Minors) (Contact: Discretion): FD 9 Sep 1998

A failure by a magistrate first to record his reasons in writing before announcing his decision did not vitiate the order made. Much time could be saved by this, and family courts should not get bound up in minor procedural issues. It was within the magistrates’ discretion to order only indirect contact where the mother … Continue reading In Re P (Minors) (Contact: Discretion): FD 9 Sep 1998

Spring v Guardian Assurance Plc and Others: HL 7 Jul 1994

The plaintiff, who worked in financial services, complained of the terms of the reference given by his former employer. Having spoken of his behaviour towards members of the team, it went on: ‘his former superior has further stated he is a man of little or no integrity and could not be regarded as honest . … Continue reading Spring v Guardian Assurance Plc and Others: HL 7 Jul 1994

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

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

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

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

In Re X (Minors) (Care Proceedings: Parental Responsibility): FD 7 Jan 2000

Even though a local authority had obtained an interim care order in an application for the child to be committed to its care, that did not prevent the unmarried mother entering into a parental responsibility agreement with the child’s father. The children were subject to interim orders, and the plan was to place them for … Continue reading In Re X (Minors) (Care Proceedings: Parental Responsibility): FD 7 Jan 2000

In re W (a Child) (Care proceedings: Leave to apply): FD 11 Nov 2004

Miss W appealed refusal of leave to be made party to care proceedings in respect of her niece. She had wanted to make representations and felt that if not a party her views would not be respected. The application was opposed by the authority and the guardian, but supported by the mother and other family … Continue reading In re W (a Child) (Care proceedings: Leave to apply): FD 11 Nov 2004

Bank Line Ltd v Arthur Capel and Co: HL 12 Dec 1918

The defendant ship-owners contracted to lease the ship on charter to the plaintiffs. Before the term, the ship was requisitioned for the war effort. The plaintiffs did not exercise the contractual right given to them to cancel the charterparty. The charterparty embodied no specific date as the date for the initial delivery of the vessel; … Continue reading Bank Line Ltd v Arthur Capel and Co: HL 12 Dec 1918

Re S and D (Child Care Powers of the Court ): CA 1995

The court considered the powers of the court in care proceedings where it did not approve the authority’s proposed care plan. The judge had made supervision orders in relation to both children coupled with an injunction restraining the mother from removing the children from the foster home in which the local authority had placed them. … Continue reading Re S and D (Child Care Powers of the Court ): CA 1995

Collins v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council: Admn 29 Oct 2008

The court was asked whether the Claimant became a ‘looked after child’ as defined in Section 22(1) of the 1989 Act. Citations: [2009] 1 FLR 493, [2009] Fam Law 14, (2009) 12 CCL Rep 59, [2009] PTSR CS35, [2008] EWHC 2551 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Children Act 1989 22(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Children Updated: … Continue reading Collins v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council: Admn 29 Oct 2008

Regina v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (ex parte Kujtim): CA 31 Mar 1999

A person had been assessed by the local authority under section 47 as being a person in urgent need of care and attention which was not otherwise available to him, so that he satisfied the criteria laid down in section 21(1)(a). He claimed that, following that assessment, the local authority had to meet these needs … Continue reading Regina v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (ex parte Kujtim): CA 31 Mar 1999

Office of Fair Trading and others v IBA Health Limited: CA 19 Feb 2004

The OFT had considered whether it was necessary to refer a merger between two companies to the Competition Commission, and decided against. The Competition Appeal Tribunal held that the proposed merger should have been referred. The OFT and parties appealed. Held: The Tribunal had misdirected itself as to one test. The statutory test required the … Continue reading Office of Fair Trading and others v IBA Health Limited: CA 19 Feb 2004

B and B v A County Council: CA 21 Nov 2006

The claimants sought damages from the defendant local authority after their identities had been wrongfully revealed to the natural parents of the adoptees leading to a claimed campaign of harassment. The adopters has specifically requested that their names and address be not revealed, but they details were let slip in a case conference. Both parties … Continue reading B and B v A County Council: CA 21 Nov 2006

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

Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011

The claimant had produced the Star War films which made use of props, in particular a ‘Stormtrooper’ helmet designed by the defendant. The defendant had then himself distributed models of the designs he had created. The appellant obtained judgment against the respondent in the US for punitive damages, but these had not been collected, and … Continue reading Lucasfilm Ltd and Others v Ainsworth and Another: SC 27 Jul 2011

Cheshire County Council and others v DS (Father) and others: CA 15 Mar 2007

The court granted an appeal in care proceedings, but examined the relationship between the court and local authorities. There had been a late change in the proposed care plan and an application by grandparents to be made party. Some in the authority, and the guardian, wanted a stranger adoption, but the authority and the family … Continue reading Cheshire County Council and others v DS (Father) and others: CA 15 Mar 2007

Regina v Northavon District Council, ex parte Smith: CA 4 Aug 1993

A local Authority has a duty to act upon a housing request for children even though the family were intentionally homeless. Citations: Independent 18-Aug-1993, Times 04-Aug-1993 Statutes: Housing Act 1985, Children Act 1989 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v Northavon District Council ex parte Smith HL 18-Jul-1994 Local Authority is … Continue reading Regina v Northavon District Council, ex parte Smith: CA 4 Aug 1993

In Re F (Minors) (Parental Home: Ouster): CA 1 Dec 1993

Neither the Children Act nor the court’s inherent jurisdiction allows the making of an ouster order without violence. A specific issue order gave no jurisdiction for the ouster of a joint tenant father. In the case of an ouster order to protect children, the court may use its power to order a transfer of property. … Continue reading In Re F (Minors) (Parental Home: Ouster): CA 1 Dec 1993

Re J (A Child) (Reporting Restriction: Internet: Video): FD 5 Sep 2013

‘This case raises important questions about the extent to which the public should be able to read and see what disgruntled parents say when they speak out about what they see as deficiencies in the family justice system, particularly when, as here, their complaints are about the care system. The case also raises important questions … Continue reading Re J (A Child) (Reporting Restriction: Internet: Video): FD 5 Sep 2013

HM Chief Inspector of Schools v Spicer: Admn 12 Mar 2004

The applicant was refused registration as a child minder, on the basis that a person is qualified for registration for childminding if she is ‘suitable to look after children under the age of eight’ and that the applicant was said not to be suitable. Held: The burden of proof is on the Applicant in applications … Continue reading HM Chief Inspector of Schools v Spicer: Admn 12 Mar 2004

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: ComC 3 Feb 2004

The claimant had obtained orders against two companies who banked with the respondent. Asset freezing orders were served on the bank, but within a short time the customer used the bank’s Faxpay national service to transfer substantial sums outside the bank’s branch controls, and defeat the freezing order. The claimant sought recovery from the bank. … Continue reading Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc: ComC 3 Feb 2004

Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Kehoe: CA 5 Mar 2004

The claimant had applied to the Child Support Agncy for maintenance. They failed utterly to obtain payment, and she complained now that she was denied the opportunity by the 1991 Act to take court proceedings herself. Held: The denial of access to the courts under section 8 did not engage her civil rights. The Act … Continue reading Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Kehoe: CA 5 Mar 2004

McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Nov 2001

Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint. Held: Rules granting the State immunities, did not infringe the applicants’ right to … Continue reading McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Nov 2001

Bewry, Regina (on The Application of) v Norfolk County Council: Admn 6 Oct 2010

The claimant had had foster care of two children. They were with temporary respite placements when the respondent decided to place in a different foster setting but without consulting the claimant or otherwise giving him notice. Held: (ex tempore) The request was granted. There was no general duty at common law to consult with a … Continue reading Bewry, Regina (on The Application of) v Norfolk County Council: Admn 6 Oct 2010

SO, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham: CA 12 Oct 2010

The court was asked upon whom falls the financial burden of providing accommodation to an eighteen year old asylum seeker who is also a ‘former relevant child’, to the extent that his welfare requires it, where the asylum seeker is not in education or training. Does it fall upon the local authority, pursuant to its … Continue reading SO, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham: CA 12 Oct 2010

Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of): SC 25 Jun 2014

Criminality of Assisting Suicide not Infringing The court was asked: ‘whether the present state of the law of England and Wales relating to assisting suicide infringes the European Convention on Human Rights, and whether the code published by the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to prosecutions of those who are alleged to have assisted a … Continue reading Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of): SC 25 Jun 2014

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay: HL 19 Feb 1986

Three applicants had lied on entry to secure admission, stayed for a considerable time, and had been treated as illegal immigrants under section 33(1). The fourth’s claim that upon being returned he would been killed, had been rejected without investigation. Held: A claim to refugee status was not an exception to the ban on appeals … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay: HL 19 Feb 1986

McKennitt and others v Ash and Another: QBD 21 Dec 2005

The claimant sought to restrain publication by the defendant of a book recounting very personal events in her life. She claimed privacy and a right of confidence. The defendant argued that there was a public interest in the disclosures. Held: Documents showed a readiness in the defendant to seek to manipulate the claimant through threats … Continue reading McKennitt and others v Ash and Another: QBD 21 Dec 2005

ETS v BT; in re T (A child); In Re L (a child) (internal relocation: shared residence order: CA 28 Jan 2009

The mother appealed against a residence order granting the father equal time with the child, saying that she wished to move away. Held: Wall LJ examined the authorities.Wall LJ P said: ‘In twenty years time it will not matter a row of beans whether or not L spent x or y hours more with one … Continue reading ETS v BT; in re T (A child); In Re L (a child) (internal relocation: shared residence order: CA 28 Jan 2009

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Brind: HL 7 Feb 1991

The Home Secretary had issued directives to the BBC and IBA prohibiting the broadcasting of speech by representatives of proscribed terrorist organisations. The applicant journalists challenged the legality of the directives on the ground that they were incompatible with the ECHR, and also on the ground that they were disproportionate in going beyond the established … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Brind: HL 7 Feb 1991

Farm Assist Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (No 2): TCC 19 May 2009

The mediator who had acted in attempting to resolve the dispute between the parties sought to have set aside a witness summons issued by the claimant who sought to have the mediated agreement set aside for economic duress. Held: In this case the balance was in favour of the mediator giving the evidence requested. In … Continue reading Farm Assist Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (No 2): TCC 19 May 2009

T (A Child) v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council: CA 19 Mar 2008

A supervision order had been made for twelve months. There was a concern at contact with the mother’s mother’s partner. The father appealed refusal of an order extending the period to three years. Held: Such an order was permissible. Judges: Lord Justice Thorpe, Lady Justice Arden and Lord Justice Hughes Citations: [2008] EWCA Civ 199, … Continue reading T (A Child) v Wakefield Metropolitan District Council: CA 19 Mar 2008

In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): HL 28 Oct 2004

Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to be applied to avoid … Continue reading In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): HL 28 Oct 2004

Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1979

The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to be disclosed during the hearing, but the court had had no power … Continue reading Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1979

Southwark London Borough Council v B and Others: FD 29 Jul 1998

The date for consideration of whether the first or second threshold criteria had been met for care was when application made, or if continuous temporary arrangements for care made, from the date those arrangements were installed. Consistency between limbs was required. Citations: Gazette 26-Aug-1998, Times 29-Jul-1998, Gazette 16-Sep-1998 Statutes: Children Act 1989 31(2)(a) Jurisdiction: England … Continue reading Southwark London Borough Council v B and Others: FD 29 Jul 1998

L, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: Admn 19 Mar 2006

The court considered the duties on the respondent in providing an enhanced criminal record certificate. In one case, the claimant had brought up her son who was made subject to child protection procedures for neglect. Her job involved supervising children at lunch time at a school. In the second case, a school head teacher had … Continue reading L, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: Admn 19 Mar 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