Category: Children

Osman v Elasha: CA 24 Jun 1999

The court was asked to make an order for return of three children from the Sudan.
Held: The court emphasised ‘the importance of according to each state liberty to determine the family justice system and principles that it deems appropriate to protect the child and to serve his best interests’ and ‘the further development of international collaboration to combat child abduction may well depend upon the capacity of states to respect a variety of concepts of child welfare derived from differing cultures and traditions. A recognition of this reality must inform judicial policy with regard to the return of children abducted from non-member states.’

Judges:

Thorpe, Stuart Smith and Pill LJJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1669, [2000] Fam 62

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re J (A Child), Re (Child returned abroad: Convention Rights); (Custody Rights: Jurisdiction) HL 16-Jun-2005
The parents had married under shariah law. They left the US to return to the father’s home country Saudi Arabia. They parted, and the mother brought their son to England against the father’s wishes and in breach of an agreement. The father sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146584

In Re TB (Minors) (Care Proceedings: Criminal Trial): CA 29 Jun 1995

Pending criminal proceedings against a family need not stop care proceedings going ahead. Butler-Sloss LJ said: ‘One starts with the fact that the criminal proceedings of themselves are not a reason to adjourn the care proceedings. There must be some detriment to the children in the broadest terms for not bringing on the care proceedings because delay is detrimental generally to the children . . I think that we do have to hold the line that in the majority of cases, unless there are circumstances which warrant taking a different course, that the care proceedings should come on, even if they are to be heard before the criminal proceedings. That is in line with the President’s ruling and it is a ruling which this court ought respectfully to follow. ‘

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

Times 29-Jun-1995, [1995] 2 FLR 801

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.82231

M v V: FD 23 Jun 2010

The mother applied for financial provision for her daughter. The father said the court did not have jurisdiction to make an order. An agreement had been reached between them under French law acknowledging F’s paternity and otherwise.

Judges:

Sir Nicholas wall P

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 1453 (Fam), [2011] 1 FLR 109, [2010] Fam Law 923

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.417781

Re W (Children): CA 9 Feb 2010

Judges:

Wall, Rimer and Wilson LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 57, [2010] 1 FCR 365, [2010] Fam Law 447

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v B County Council, ex parte P CA 1991
Application was made for judicial review of a decision of the magistrate in proceedings under the Children and Young Persons Act. The issue arose as to whether or not young children should be compelled to give evidence.
Held: The decision of . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.396635

G v A: CA 18 Mar 2009

‘application for permission to appeal a tiny part of contentious proceedings between the parents of a child. The area of dispute that I review is a financial application ‘

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 357

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.365598

B v S: CA 14 May 2009

A mother appealed against an order for her imprisonment for contempt in refusing to obey an order to make a child available for contact. The prison would be unable to accept her other child, a baby at short notice, and application was on the basis of that child’s human right to be with his mother.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and a further hearing date set.

Judges:

Lord Justice Wilson

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 548, [2009] Fam Law 1028, [2009] 2 FLR 1005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contempt of Court, Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.347210

Re OT (A Child): CA 14 May 2009

Parents sought leave to challenge a decision made on the request of their child’s doctors to discontinue treatment to avoid a more painful but inevitable death. The parents alleged a defect in the procedure applied by the hospital.
Held: Permission to appeal was refused. The child’s death was inevitable. The hospital sought advice from third party doctors which confirmed their advice. ‘The facts (so we considered) were clear; the medical opinion was unambiguous; and, although one could not reasonably expect the parents to be able to bring objective opinion to bear upon so dreadful a situation, the only proper programme for OT in his interests was, as his own independent, professional representative contended, entirely obvious. Our view was that any accession by the trial judge to Mr Bowen’s application for an adjournment, whether on 6 March or on 19 March 2009 or, insofar as it could be said actually then to have been made, on any of the intervening days, would, in the light of OT’s condition, itself have been appealable. What plainly was not appealable was the judge’s decision to proceed forthwith, to conduct a full-scale, intensive, efficient yet unhurried determination, calibrated with an urgency commensurate with his generally deteriorating condition, of the most painful and profound issue imaginable, namely in effect whether OT should pass on immediately, or a little later following (so the judge found after an elaborate net reckoning of all relevant factors) profound further pain and misery.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Wilson

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 409

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Glass v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Mar-2004
The applicant’s adult son was disabled. There was a disagreement with the hospital about his care. The hospital considered that to alleviate his distress, he should not be resuscitated. The family wanted to take him home, fearing euthanasia. The . .
Cited – Wyatt and Another v Portsmouth Hospital NHS and Another CA 12-Oct-2005
The appellants’ daughter had been born with very severe disabilities. Her doctors obtained an order allowing them a discretion not to ventilate her to keep her alive if necessary. She had improved, but the family now sought leave to appeal an order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.343893

Hillingdon, Regina (on the Application of) v the Secretary of State for Education and Skills: Admn 15 Mar 2007

Judges:

Forbes J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 514 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children (Leaving Care) Act 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Behre and Others) v Hillingdon London Borough Council Admn 29-Aug-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.250044

Re B and A and C and D (Contact and Parental Responsibility: Lesbian Mothers and Known Father) No 2: FD 12 Jan 2006

In deciding whether or not to make a parental responsibility order in favour of the child’s father Black J said: – ‘Perhaps most importantly of all, I am considerably influenced by the reality that Mr B is D’s father. Whatever new designs human beings have for the structure of their families, that aspect of nature cannot be overcome. It is to be hoped that as society accepts alternative arrangements more readily, as it seems likely will happen over the next few years, the impulse to hide or to marginalise a child’s father so as not to call attention to an anomalous family will decline, although accommodating the emotional consequences of untraditional fatherhood and motherhood and of the sort of de facto, non-biological parenthood that is experienced by a step-parent or same sex partner will inevitably remain discomfiting.’

Judges:

Black J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2 (Fam), [2006] 1 FCR 556

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – CG v CW and Another (Children) CA 6-Apr-2006
A lesbian couple had split up and disputed the care of the children. An order had been made but then, in breach of that order, one removed the children overnight to Cornwall. An argument was made that the court had failed to give proper weight to . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.239289

Re S (Minors)(Care Order: Appeal); Dyfed County Council v S, Re S (Discharge of Care Order): CA 6 Sep 1995

Discharge of care order is the appropriate procedure not an appeal after very long time. The court considered its approach in admitting new evidence on appeal in family law cases: ‘The willingness of the family jurisdiction to relax the ordinary rules of issue estoppel, and (at the appellate stage) the constraints of Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 upon the admission of new evidence, does not originate from laxity or benevolence but from recognition that where children are concerned there is liable to be an infinite variety of circumstance whose proper consideration in the best interests of the child is not to be trammelled by the arbitrary imposition of procedural rules. That is a policy whose sole purpose, however, is to preserve flexibility to deal with unusual circumstances.’ and ‘In the general run of cases the family courts (including the Court of Appeal when it is dealing with applications in the family jurisdiction) will be every bit as alert as courts in other jurisdictions to see to it that no one is allowed to litigate afresh issues that have already been determined. The maxim ‘sit finis litis’ is, as a general rule, rigorously enforced in children cases, where the statutory objective of an early determination of questions concerning the upbringing of a child expressed in s 1(2) of the Children Act is treated as requiring that such determination shall not only be swift but final.’

Judges:

Waite LJ

Citations:

Gazette 06-Sep-1995, [1995] 2 FLR 639

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 1(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re K (Children) (Non-accidental injuries: Perpetrator: New Evidence) CA 27-Aug-2004
The children had been taken into care, and freed for adoption. The mother appealed saying the blame for non-accidental injury was misplaced. The court had not thought her responsible for the non-accidental injuries, but she had been unwilling to . .
Cited – Webster (the Parents) v Norfolk County Council and others CA 11-Feb-2009
Four brothers and sisters had been adopted after the parents had been found to have abused them. The parents now had expert evidence that the injuries may have been the result of scurvy, and sought leave to appeal.
Held: Leave was refused. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.85875

Re MA and Others (Children): CA 31 Jul 2009

Children appealed against dismissal of their care proceedings on the basis that the threshold had not been reached. The parents resisted.
Held: It could not be said that the decision so plainly wrong that the judge’s conclusion on the facts could be set aside.

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 853, [2010] 1 FLR 431, [2010] 1 FCR 456, [2009] Fam Law 1026

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Humberside County Council v B 1993
The justices had found that a child was likely to suffer significant harm on the basis that there was evidence of such harm as the court should take into account in considering the child’s future.
Held: The finding was upheld. Booth J . .
Cited – In Re KD (A Minor) (Ward: Termination of Access) HL 1988
The local authority sought to terminate parental contact with a child taken into care under a wardship.
Held: The court had to consider the human rights of the parent as against the welfare interest of the child. Lord Oliver of Aylmerton said: . .
Cited – Re L (Care: Threshold Criteria) FD 2007
Toleration of Diverse Parenting Standards
Hedley J considered the meaning of ‘significant harm’: ‘What about the court’s approach . . to the issue of significant harm? In order to understand this concept and the range of harm that it’s intended to encompass, it is right to begin with issues . .
Cited – Re L (Children), (Care Proceedings: Significant Harm) CA 25-Aug-2006
The Court allowed an appeal by parents against a judge’s conclusion that their children had suffered and were likely to suffer significant harm and it remitted the issue for re-hearing. The professional evidence had been that the parents’ . .
Cited – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.368597

Re H (Children): CA 23 Jun 2009

‘appeal by the Chief Constable of Sussex against an order of HHJ Stephen Lloyd, deputy circuit judge, dated 23 February 2009. By that order he refused an application by the Chief Constable for certain disclosure out of care proceedings before him, namely of the statements made by the parents of the relevant children, of the expert medical reports and of any judgments or schedule of agreed facts. Leave to appeal to this court was given by the judge himself. The essential thrust of the appeal is that the balancing exercise about disclosure performed by the judge was flawed, not least because through inadvertence he was not referred to certain rule changes to the Family Proceedings Rules 1991.’

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 704, [2009] 2 FLR 1531

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.347733

Newport City Council v GW and others: FD 17 Oct 2006

An application by a local authority for care orders which has gone badly wrong. On the seventh day of the final hearing evidence came to light which changed the whole complexion of the case and resulted in leading counsel for the local authority applying to have the application dismissed.

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3671 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.279024

GC v SB: FD 21 Dec 2005

Proceedings are brought under the Hague Convention by the Plaintiff father an Australian national resident in New South Wales. He seeks an order against his former wife for the return to Australia of their two children of the marriage, A born in 1996 (now aged 9) and R in 2000, (now aged 5). The mother brought the children to England on holiday with the consent of the father in order to visit the mother’s parents. Instead of returning to Australia as arranged, the mother has since remained in the United Kingdom with the children.

Judges:

Sir Mark Potter P

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2988 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.236622

A County Council v M and Another: FC 23 Apr 2021

Two applications: by a grandmother under section 10(9) Children Act 1989 for permission to apply for either a Special Guardianship Order or a Child Arrangements Order with respect to a child (H) who is seven months old; and an application by the local authority under the inherent jurisdiction for permission not to carry out any assessment of her as a possible carer.

Judges:

The Hon Mrs Justice Judd

Citations:

[2021] EWFC 35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.662340

In re W (Wardship: Discharge: Publicity): CA 1995

Four wards of court aged between nine and 14 had given an interview to a newspaper reporter, who plainly knew that they were wards of court, in circumstances which clearly troubled both the Official Solicitor, their guardian ad litem, who immediately applied for injunctions to restrain any repetition.
Held: The views about the courts system of the mothers and fathers caught up in it, are: ‘matters of public interest which can and should be discussed publicly’. Injunctions were refused.
Balcombe LJ commented: ‘I accept that the representation of children in family proceedings, and the role of the Official Solicitor, are matters of public interest which can and should be discussed publicly. I also accept that a boy of 15 may be sufficiently mature to be able to speak directly to, and be interviewed by, representatives of the press or broadcasting media. However, there can be no public interest in identifying members of his family: that would be only public curiosity.
Further, the three younger boys are unlikely to be of sufficient intellectual or emotional maturity to appreciate the dangers inherent in becoming involved in media publicity. In my judgment, a proper balance between these conflicting considerations can be achieved by amending the order of 19th May 1994.’

Judges:

Balcombe, Waite LJJ

Citations:

[1995] 2 FLR 466

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Cited – Doctor A and Others v Ward and Another FD 8-Jan-2010
Parents wished to publicise the way care proceedings had been handled, naming the doctors, social workers and experts some of whom had been criticised. Their names had been shown as initials so far, and interim contra mundum orders had been made . .
Cited – Kelly (A Minor) v British Broadcasting Corporation FD 25-Jul-2000
K, aged 16, had left home to join what was said to be a religious sect. His whereabouts were unknown. He had been made a ward of court and the Official Solicitor was appointed to represent his interests. He had sent messages to say that he was well . .
Cited – Re A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.194859

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. The mother appealed against the making of the injunction, and local authority appealed against the judge’s refusal to make a care order. The judge had said: ‘I have to ask the question, what on earth are we to do where a local authority refuses to be persuaded by what, in my judgment, is absolutely overwhelming evidence to the effect that their plan is flawed? They have had ample opportunities to review their stance. It would have been no discredit to them at all had they decided to review the position in the light of what has been said. They have chosen not to.
I cannot make a care order. These two children in my judgment, cannot be allowed to remain in the care of their mother. That must be prevented if it can.’
Held: Both appeals were allowed. Balcombe LJ: ‘The Judge is therefore faced with the dilemma with which this Judge was faced that, if he makes a care order, the local authority may implement a care plan which he or she may take the view is not in the child or children’s best interests. On the other hand, if he makes no order, he may be leaving the child in the care of an irresponsible, and indeed wholly inappropriate parent.
It seems to me that, regrettable though it may seem, the only course he may take is to choose what he considers to be the lesser of two evils. If he has no other route open to him – and certainly the route chosen by the Judge in this case was one which, in my judgment, was not open to him – then that is the unfortunate position he has to face.
I have to say that this is not a position to which Judges who exercise jurisdiction in the family courts are unaccustomed. There is very rarely a right answer in relation to children – it is usually a case of trying to decide which is the less wrong one.
It is an unhappy position, where there is a dispute between all those whose professional duty it is to have the best interests of the children at heart, if they cannot reach agreement. But in those particular circumstances, as I see it, the Judge really has no alternative. He has to choose what he believes to be the lesser of two evils. That may be making a care order with the knowledge that the care plan is one which he does not approve, or it may be making no order with the consequences to which I have already adverted.’

Judges:

Balcombe LJ

Citations:

[1995] 1 FCR 626

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – B (Minors) CA 27-Nov-1996
The case concerned applications for care orders. Four young girls would be separated from their elder sister and their mother, who sought interim contact. The judge disagreed with the care plan proposed by the local authority. His powers were, . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.182947

Ex parte Crook: CA 1995

A criminal court trying parents for the manslaughter of one child and cruelty to three others had made an order under section 39 prohibiting the identification of the surviving children. The judge expressed the view that identifying the parents or the dead child would lead to the identification of the surviving children. Two journalists appealed.
Held: ‘We entirely agree . . . that as a general proposition there is a strong and proper public interest in knowing the identity of those who have committed crimes, particularly serious and detestable crimes. If, as the appellants suggest, there is a growing tendency for the court to use or misuse their powers to prevent the disclosure of the identity of defendants or other persons concerned in criminal proceedings, we are as concerned as they to restrict such a tendency and to ensure that such orders are only made when they are justified.’ The court also pointed out that the media were free to take the risk and disregard the judge’s advice that identifying the parents or the dead child would be in breach of the order, although in practice what he had said was ‘obviously correct’. In making his order, the judge was required to weigh the interest in the full reporting of the crime, ‘including the identification of the defendants’, against the need to protect the victims from further harm. He was persuaded that the likely harm to the children outweighed the restrictions on freedom to publish. The Court of Appeal, dismissing the appeal, said that on the evidence before him the judge was clearly correct. Thus, while there is undoubtedly an importance public interest in the identification of defendants, in particular those found guilty of serious crimes, there are circumstances in which it can be outweighed by the need to protect their victims from further harm.

Judges:

Glidewell LJ

Citations:

[1995] 1 WLR 139

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Briffett v Director of Public Prosecutions; Bradshaw v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 6-Nov-2001
A bare order restricting reporting under the section was too vague to allow a later prosecution for contempt. Crook had established that the court must specify just what restrictions are to apply. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.183131

In Re T (A Minor) (Contact Order); In Re T (Adoption: Contact): CA 13 Jan 1995

A contact order which was not strictly necessary should not be made in adoption proceedings. Arrangements for contact should not be ‘imposed’ upon the adoptive parents but should be ‘left to their good sense so that they could be trusted to do what they believe to be in the best interests of their daughter.’ Butler-Sloss LJ indicated that the court could intervene in future and make an order if the adoptive parents were to behave unreasonably

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

Times 13-Jan-1995, [1995] 2 FLR 251

Statutes:

Adoption Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Oxfordshire County Council v X and Others CA 27-May-2010
The LA, the guardian and adoptive parents appealed against an order that they should provide to the parents an annual photograph of the child. They contended that an image should only be made available to be viewed at the authority’s offices . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Adoption

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.82219

In Re B (Minors) (Change of Surname): CA 1 Dec 1995

The mother sought to change the surname of the three children of the family from that of her divorced husband to that of the husband whom she had subsequently married. Her application for leave was refused by the circuit judge. She appealed.
Held: The appeal failed. A change of children’s surname was refused despite clear wishes of teenage children.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith LJ and Wilson J

Citations:

Times 01-Dec-1995, [1996] 1 FLR 791

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Dawson v Wearmouth HL 4-Feb-1999
The parents were unmarried. The mother had registered the child under her former partner’s surname. The father sought an order that his name be used instead. The mother’s apeal against an order to that effect had succeeded.
Held: The father’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.81726

In Re G (A Minor) (Social Worker: Disclosure): CA 14 Nov 1995

A social worker may relate oral admissions made by parents to him to the police without first getting a court’s permission.
Butler-Sloss LJ said: ‘I would on balance and in the absence of argument give the more restrictive interpretation to r 4.23 and limit it to documents held by the court in the court file. I doubt that it extends to documents created for the purposes of the proceedings even if intended to be filed with the court, since they may not in fact become part of the court file. It is important that the rule should not be widely and loosely interpreted so as to bring within its ambit information at a stage when I am sure it was not intended to be covered and which would be contrary to wider considerations of the best interests of the child.’
Sir Roger Parker said: ‘The wording of rule 4.23 of the Family Proceedings Rules 1991 appears to me to be plain. Leave to disclose is only required in respect of documents and only in respect of documents held by the court . The rule thus follows established wardship practice as can be seen from the judgments of this Court in re D (Minors)(Wardship:Disclosure) [1994] 1 FLR 346. I can see neither need nor justification for extending the scope of the words so as to require leave for the disclosure of information imparted to a social worker and recorded in case notes or a report which for one reason or another has never reached the court. To do so would, in my view, not be construction but a complete rewriting of the rule and thus legislation, which is neither the function nor within the powers of the court. ‘

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ, Sir Roger Parker

Citations:

Times 14-Nov-1995, Gazette 06-Dec-1995, Independent 08-Dec-1995, [1996] 1 WLR 1407, [1996] 1 FLR 276

Statutes:

Family Proceedings Rules 1991 4.23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Doctor A and Others v Ward and Another FD 9-Feb-2010
. .
Cited – Doctor A and Others v Ward and Another FD 8-Jan-2010
Parents wished to publicise the way care proceedings had been handled, naming the doctors, social workers and experts some of whom had been criticised. Their names had been shown as initials so far, and interim contra mundum orders had been made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Children

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.81901

In Re M (Minors) (Abduction: Peremptory Return Order): CA 20 Nov 1995

An English court should usually assume that proceedings abroad will provide for a fair hearing. The court refused to admit evidence of the legal system in Dubai and assumed that the wife would receive a fair hearing there.

Citations:

Times 20-Nov-1995, [1996] 1 FLR 478

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re J (A Child), Re (Child returned abroad: Convention Rights); (Custody Rights: Jurisdiction) HL 16-Jun-2005
The parents had married under shariah law. They left the US to return to the father’s home country Saudi Arabia. They parted, and the mother brought their son to England against the father’s wishes and in breach of an agreement. The father sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.82033

Re M (Care Proceedings – Neglect – Placement With Father): FC 4 May 2021

M has extra needs compared to other children of his age.
A parent looking after him needs to help him manage:
– His education;
– His worries and anxiety;
– Making sure he goes to bed and gets up on time;
– Keeping his weight down and helping him live a healthy life;
– Helping him make friends;
– Helping him find interests and activities to do outside the home.
M’s mum loves him very much. She has tried her best to look after him.
When M was living with her she was not able to give him the care he needed to keep him healthy, happy and safe.
Even with lots of help from the local authority, M’s mum was not able to make changes so that things got better for M.
The judge has decided that M should stay living with his dad and [his partner C].
Since he has been living with his dad there have been some positive changes for M. He has been attending education 80% of the time. He has a better sleep routine. He is more relaxed and less anxious.
His dad and C still need a lot of help to meet M’s needs.
Oxfordshire County Council will work with [X] children’s services to help them care for M and give him what he needs.
M will see his mum regularly. At the start he will see her once a month. If things go well he can see her more often and can stay overnight.

Citations:

[2021] EWFC B23

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.662336

Practice Direction (Ward: Witness at Trial): EW 11 Nov 1987

‘Where the police desire to interview a child who is already a ward of court application must be made for leave for the police to do so . . If it is desired to conduct any interview beyond what is permitted by the order further application should be made for this purpose.
The President directs that all of the above applications be made to a judge on summons on notice to all parties.’

Judges:

Sir John Arnold P

Citations:

[1987] 1 WLR 1739

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Updated – Practice Direction (Ward: Witness at Trial) (No 2) FD 18-Jul-1988
‘The registrar’s direction of 11 November 1987, Practice Direction (Ward: Witness at Trial) [1987] 1 W.L.R. 1739, set out the procedure to be followed to obtain leave for the police to interview a child who is a ward of court. It provided that all . .
Cited – Re A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.588738

GD and BD (Children) (Rev 1): FD 20 Dec 2016

Children sought damages from police and local authorities. They were taken into care when police suspected sexual abuse by their mother. The police continued with the case after it had been made clear to them that the suspicion was groundless, and failed to disclose the facts to others involved or the parents, and indeed continued the allegation they knew to be false.
Held: ‘The breaches of the Claimants Article 6 and Article 8 rights on these facts are profound, obvious and wide-ranging.’

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3312 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii, FLW

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.573713

Kirklees Council v RE: FD 3 Oct 2014

Application by Kirklees Council for various declarations in relation to a young baby boy, SE, who was desperately ill in hospital. In essence, Kirklees applied for a declaration that it was not in SE’s interests to receive further life sustaining treatment. By the time the case was heard, the Local Authority applied for a further declaration, namely that it was lawful for his treating clinicians to provide him with palliative care only.

Judges:

Moor J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 3182 (Fam), (2015) 142 BMLR 170, [2015] 1 FLR 1316, 142 BMLR 170, [2015] 2 FCR 438, [2015] FLR 1316, [2014] Fam Law 1679

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Health

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.537739