Category: Children

KA, Regina (on The Application of) v Essex County Council: Admn 18 Jan 2013

The claimant, an illegal immigrant challenged the refusal of the respondent Council to provide support to her children under the 1989 Act.

Judges:

Robin Purchas QC

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 43 (Admin), [2013] 1 WLR 1163, [2013] 2 FCR 319, [2013] BLGR 363, [2013] WLR(D) 60, (2013) 16 CCL Rep 63

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Children Act 1989, Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Immigration, Local Government

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.470363

In re Stedman: FD 18 May 2009

An application was made for the continuation and extension of a reporting restriction order. The parents of the children were themselves under age, and there had been intense media interest.
Held: A privacy injunction was refused even after an avalanche of publicity about a 12-year-old boy who was (wrongly) alleged to have impregnated a 15-year-old girl.

Judges:

Eleanor King J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 935 (Fam), [2009] 2 FLR 852, [2009] Fam Law 932

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re A (A Minor) FD 8-Jul-2011
An application was made in care proceedings for an order restricting publication of information about the family after the deaths of two siblings of the child subject to the application. The Sun and a local newspaper had already published stories . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347352

In re P-J (Children) (Abduction: Consent): CA 23 Jun 2009

An application was made under the 1985 Act. The mother answered by saying that the removal of the child had been approved by the father.
Held: The mother’s appeal failed. The father had clearly indicated that he withdrew his consent before the mother left Spain. The time which mattered was the state of consent at the time of the removal. The court set out applicable principles for testing whether there was consent: ‘(i) consent to removal of a child had to be clear and unequivocal;
(ii) consent could be given to the removal at some future but unspecified time or upon the happening of some future event;
(iii) such advance consent had, however, still to be operative and in force at the time of the actual removal;
(iv) the happening of the future event had to be reasonably capable of ascertainment, and in particular had not to depend on the subjective determination of one party;
(v) consent, or the lack thereof, had to be viewed in the context of the realities of family life, or more precisely in the context of the realities of the disintegration of family life;
(vi) consequently, consent could be withdrawn at any time before actual removal, and, if it was so withdrawn, the proper course was for any dispute about removal to be resolved by the courts of the country of habitual residence before the child was removed;
(vii) the burden of proving the consent rested on the person asserting it;
(viii) the inquiry was inevitably fact-specific;
(ix) the ultimate question was a simple one, whether the other parent had clearly and unequivocally consented to the removal.’

Judges:

Ward, Wilson LJJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 588, [2009] Fam Law 786, [2009] 2 FLR 1051, [2010] 1 FCR 32

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – In re P-J (Children) (Abduction: Consent) FD 2009
. .

Cited by:

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

Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347199

In re M (A Child): CA 18 Mar 2008

The parents had been involved in bitter and very public divorce and ancillary relief proceedings. Application had been made to redact from the public report of the proceedings matters relating their child. The mother appealed against the order made.
Held: The appeal failed.
Thorpe LJ said that ‘although all litigants have a confident expectation of a private hearing, no litigant can have a confident expectation that the resulting judgment will not be released to the public domain.’
Wall desribed the order as a classic case of a judge exercising a discretion. The case of Bellenden, as approved in G v G is the leading case. Following that ‘the function of this court in my judgment is to review the decision made by the judge and to ask itself whether or not any of the following three questions is arguable:
1) Did the judge leave out of account or not give sufficient weight to any particular factor in the case?
2) Has he given no weight or inadequate weight to factors which are relevant? And
3) In the performance of what has become popularly known as the balancing exercise, has he reached a conclusion which was plainly wrong or arguably plainly wrong?’

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Wall LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1543

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347061

In re B (A Child): CA 18 Nov 2008

Local Authority’s appeal as to findings of source of injury suffered by infant before being taken into care.

Judges:

Thorpe, Lawrence Collins, Goldring LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1547, [2009] Fam Law 281, [2009] 2 FLR 14

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347062

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

Caim for judicial review brought by the mother of four children against a decision made by Birmingham City Council relating to payments to be made to her for both her benefit and that of the children, under provisions of the Children Act, in particular section 17, but also potentially section 20. The overall effect of the decision of the local authority is that it has concluded that, given the restrictions on its powers it will fund the costs of the return of the family to Jamaica, but will not fund continuing costs of accommodating the family, as a family, in the United Kingdom, and thus in the area for which it is responsible.

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 3036 (Admin), [2009] 1 FLR 838, [2009] 1 All ER 1039, [2009] Fam Law 200, (2009) 12 CCL Rep 79, [2009] 1 FCR 657

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.278825

In re B (Appeal: Lack of Reasons): 2003

Judges:

Thorpe LJ

Citations:

[2003] 2 FLR 1035

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re G (a Child) (Care proceedings: Placement for Adoption) CA 14-Jul-2005
Grandparents appealed aganst an order of the judge releasing the care of the child to the local authority with a view to adoption.
Held: The findings of fact and reasoning were insufficiently well set out and the judge had given insufficient . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.229649

Regina v Vann: 1851

A parent of a child who had not the means of providing for the burial of the body of his deceased child was not liable to be indicted for the misdemeanour of not providing for its burial, even though a nuisance was occasioned by the body remaining unburied. ‘It is true that a man is bound to give Christian burial to his deceased child if he has the means of doing so; but he is not liable to be indicted for a nuisance, if he has not the means of providing burial for it. He cannot sell the body, put it into a hole, or throw it into the river; but unless he has the means of giving the body Christian burial he is not liable to be indicted, even though a nuisance may be occasioned by leaving the body unburied, for which the parish officer would probably be liable.’

Judges:

Lord Campbell CJ

Citations:

[1851] 2 Den 325

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – Clarke v London General Omnibus Co Ltd 1906
The parent of an infant child who dies where the parent has the means to do so, has a responsibility to arrange and pay for the burial. . .
Approved – Regina v Gwynedd County Council ex parte B and Another 1992
The ambit of the 1980 act does not extend to regulating events arising after a child’s death. . .
Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.195007

TDT, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 29 Jul 2016

The claimant child alleged that the defendant had released him from administrative immigration detention without first putting safeguarding arrangements in place, leave him iat risk, in particular of becoming victim to human trafficking.

Judges:

McGowan J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1912 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Children, Human Rights

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.567874

Kebede and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Newcastle City Council: CA 31 Jul 2013

The claimant challenged refusal by the defendant to provide financial support for his studies.

Judges:

Laws, McCombe LJJ, Sir Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 960, [2013] WLR(D) 322

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 23C(4) 24B(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Kebede and Another v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills Admn 31-Jul-2013
The claimants challenged refusal of financial support for their studies, being immigrants with discretionary leave to remain.
Held: It was submitted ‘ that the provision of a loan to pay fees is one removed from the imposition of fees itself, . .

Cited by:

Cited – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.514239

J v G: FD 26 Mar 2013

Application for a parental order under the 2008 Act following a surrogacy arrangement in California, USA using IVF.

Judges:

Theis DBE J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1432 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 54

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re X (A Child) (Surrogacy: Time Limit) FD 3-Oct-2014
Extension of Time for Parental Order
The court considered the making of a parental order in respect of a child through surrogacy procedures outside the time limits imposed by the 2008 Act. The child had been born under Indian surrogacy laws. The commissioning parents (now the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.510201

In re B (A Child); GB v RJB, GLB: CA 11 Jun 2009

‘This case raises a number of points of interest for the profession relating: (1) to second appeals in children’s cases; and (2) to the application of the welfare test under section 1 of the Children Act 1989 (the 1989 Act) to a case involving a residence dispute between the father and the maternal grandmother of a child.’

Judges:

Wall, Elias LJJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 545, [2009] 2 FLR 632, [2009] Fam Law 812

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346822

NH v A County Council and Others; In re D (Children) (Care proceedings: Preliminary hearings): CA 4 Jun 2009

The father appealed against a finding that he had been the sole perpetrator of injuries to his children. There had been the first limb of a split hearing.
Held: The judge had made an unnecessary finding. It was clear that at least one of the two carers was responsible, but not clear which one, and the court was not required always to identify one responsible individual. Wall LJ said that judges should not strain to identify the perpetrator as a result of the decision in Re B: ‘If an individual perpetrator can be properly identified on the balance of probabilities, then . . it is the judge’s duty to identify him or her. But the judge should not start from the premise that it will only be in an exceptional case that it will not be possible to make such an identification.’

Judges:

Thorpe, Wall, Elias LJJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 472, Times 25-Aug-2009, [2009] 2 FCR 555, [2009] 2 FLR 668

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re L (A Child: Media Reporting) FD 18-Apr-2011
The local authority had intervened on suspecting physical abuse. L was placed with the maternal grandmother who took L to Ireland before care proceedings were commenced. The Irish court found him to have been wrongfully removed, and orders were made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346801

F v M: FD 1 Apr 2004

The court considered the ‘ongoing debate’ about the court’s role in contact disputes. ‘this case illustrates all too uncomfortably the failings of the system. There is much wrong with our system and the time has come for us to recognise that fact and to face up to it honestly. If we do not we risk forfeiting public confidence. ‘ The father in this case had behaved unwisely but the blame overwhelmingly lay with the mother who had set her mind against contact.’ The court gave guidnace on how courts should approach the management of such cases in future.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 727 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – A Father (Mr A) v A Mother (Mrs A); Their Two Children (B And C) FD 4-Feb-2004
After a divorce, the father sought a joint residence order for the two young children. The mother alleged sexually inappropriate behaviour by the father. The court found this allegation clearly untrue. The dispute was bitter and protracted. . .
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 – Re M (Intractable Contact Dispute: Interim Care Orders) FD 2003
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 . .
Cited – The Father v The Mother, O by Cafcass Legal; In re O (a Child) (Contact: Withdrawal of application) FD 12-Dec-2003
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 . .
Cited – S (A Child), Re CA 28-Jan-2004
‘The courts recognise the critical importance of the role of both parents in the lives of their children. The courts are not anti-father and pro-mother or vice versa. The court’s task, imposed by Parliament in section 1 of the Children Act 1989 in . .
Mentioned – Hokkanen v Finland ECHR 23-Sep-1994
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Not necessary to examine P7-5; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and . .
Mentioned – Sophia Gudrun Hansen v Turkey ECHR 23-Sep-2003
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 . .
Mentioned – Ignaccolo-Zenide v Romania ECHR 2000
‘Although coercive measures towards children are far from desirable in such sensitive matters, sanctions should not be ruled out where the parent living with the children acts unlawfully.’ . .
Mentioned – Nuutinen v Finland ECHR 27-Jun-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 8; Not necessary to examine other complaint under Art. 8; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses . .
Cited – Kosmopoulou v Greece ECHR 5-Feb-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Mentioned – Sylvester v Austria ECHR 15-Sep-2010
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings ; Costs and . .
Mentioned – Glaser v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Sep-2000
‘The essential object of Article 8 is to protect individuals against arbitrary interference by public authorities. There may however be positive obligations inherent in an effective ‘respect’ for family life. These obligations may involve the . .
Cited – Hoppe v Germany ECHR 5-Dec-2002
Hudoc No violation of Art. 8 ; No violation of Art. 6-1
The applicant complained that he had been denied a fair hearing in appeal proceedings concerning his right of access to his daughter contrary to . .
Cited – Hornsby v Greece ECHR 19-Mar-1997
Hudoc Violation of Art. 6-1; Preliminary objection rejected; Just satisfaction reserved – Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award
The rights . .
Cited – Immobiliare Saffi v Italy ECHR 28-Jul-1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Cited – Sommerfeld v Germany ECHR 11-Oct-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 14+8; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings . .
Cited – Sahin v Germany ECHR 11-Oct-2001
When considering the issues of an adoption against the wishes of the parents, there is an apparent difference of emphasis between saying that the child’s interests are of ‘paramount importance’, and saying that they merely ‘may, depending on their . .
Cited – In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal) CA 24-Oct-2002
After a judgment the parties sought to appeal.
Held: The judge had failed to make a finding on a critical issue in the case, namely whether or not the mother of the child concerned had ‘even if prompted only at a subconscious level, . .
Cited – Sommerfeld v Germany ECHR 8-Jul-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 8 ; Violation of Art. 14+8 with regard to right of access ; Violation of Art. 14+8 with regard to right of appeal ; Not necessary to examine Art. . .
Cited – Practice Direction (Care Cases: Judicial Continuity and Judicial Case Management) 2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.195570

Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council v S and Others: FD 6 Apr 2004

Contest between two local authorities as to which should be designated for the purpose of further interim care orders, and later for the purpose of full care orders, in respect of two children.

Judges:

Bodey J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC B3 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Children

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.396654

CDM v CM and Others: FD 15 May 2003

Intractable contact dispute – ‘the residential parent had persuaded the children (quite falsely) not only that the non-residential parent had both physically and sexually abused them, but also that the non-resident parent’s own parents, with whom the children had previously enjoyed a perfectly normal relationship, were also physical abusers and a threat to the children. The result was a cessation of all contact between the children, the non-residential parent, and the children’s wider family on that side.’
Use of care order

Judges:

Wall J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1024 (Fam), [2003] 2 FLR 636

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.347375

A v London Borough of Croydon; Regina (WK) v Kent County Council: Admn 8 May 2009

The claimants had arrived as asylum seekers, and said that they were under eighteen, and entitled to assistance as children. The social workers decided that they were older. The claimants said that insufficient attention had been given to paediatricians’ reports.
Held: The paediatricians’ views should be taken into account but they were not likely to be any more reliable or helpful than those of experienced social workers and the authorities were entitled to prefer the latter.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 939 (Admin), [2009] Fam Law 659, [2010] 1 FLR 193

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 20(1)

Cited by:

Cited – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Cited – MWA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 21-May-2014
The asylum claimant disputed the assessment that he was an adult. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Children

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.343063

In re P (A Child), Re; CS and WS v A Local Authority: CA 8 May 2009

The applicants, grandparents, sought leave to appeal against a care order and placement for adoption. The child’s parents would be unable to provide care. The grandmother siffered tinnitus and reduced vision.
Held: No error of law had been shown, and leave was refused.

Judges:

Wall LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 376

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31, Adoption and Children Act 2002 21

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.343056

Re G (Children): CA 6 Apr 2005

The court considered an application for a residence order as between same sex parents where the child was born after artificial insemination.

Judges:

Thorpe, Tuckey, Arden LJJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 462, [2005] 2 FLR 957, [2006] 1 FCR 436

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.341718

In re R (A Child): CA 29 Apr 2009

The mother appealed against an order awarding residence of her two children to the paternal grandparents.

Judges:

Wall LJ, Wilson LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 358, [2009] 2 FCR 203, [2009] Fam Law 586, [2009] 2 FLR 819

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bellenden (formerly Satterthwaite) v Satterthwaite CA 1948
The court considered the role of the appeal court in assessing an order for maintenance payable for a divorced wife. The judge’s decision had been made by an exercise of his discretion.
Held: Asquith LJ said: ‘It is, of course, not enough for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.341571

A v Liverpool City Council: HL 1981

Though the child was subject to a care order in favour of the local authority, a wardship order was sought.
Held: Once a care order had been made, whether final or interim, the court was effectively faced with a choice and not a choice which was in any sense attractive. It could either make a care order whether or not it agreed with the care plan, or it could decline to make a care order. If it declined to make a care order then the child would not be subject to any form of intervention subject to the ongoing proceedings but would return to the care of her mother in this case. If the court made an interim care order the child would be subject to the local authority’s interim care plan.
The prerogative jurisdiction of the High Court was ousted by the care order, but not the court’s inherent powers and its power under section 9. It was the child’s welfare which was the proper yardstick for any decision. If the effect sought was properly within the local authority’s discretion under the care order the wardship would lapse, but the wardship might properly be used to fill in any necessary powers otherwise unavailable. The court would decline to supervise the way in which the local authority exercised its statutory discretion. The wardship jurisdiction of the High Court in relation to children should not be used to circumvent or challenge the statutory powers and duties of local authorities in relation to children in their care

Citations:

[1982] AC 363, Times 21-May-1981, (1981) 2 FLR 222

Statutes:

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1949 9(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A (a Patient) v A Health Authority and Others; In re J (a Child); Regina (S) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 24-Jan-2002
The case asked how cases involving disputes as to the care of children, and of the treatment of adults claimed to be mentally incompetent. Where the issues were solely ones of public law, then they should be heard by way of judicial review in the . .
Cited – In re W (a Minor) (Wardship: Jurisdiction) HL 1985
Relatives of a child who was in local authority care disagreed with the authority’s plans for her future.
Held: They could not challenge them by seeking a determination on the merits in wardship.
Lord Scarman referred to Liverpool v A and . .
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 . .
Cited – Re MN (Adult) CA 7-May-2015
The parties disputed the care of MN, a young adult without capacity.
Held: Munby P gave four reasons why the Court of Protection should not embark on the kind of process for which the parents contended: first, it is not its proper function to . .
Cited – N v ACCG and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The local authority and a young man’s parents disputed his continued care, he having substantial incapacities. The parents wanted assistance caring for him on visits home. The LA declined to fund that support. The LA now argued that the CoP had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.179819

In re P (A Child): CA 30 Jul 2019

‘This appeal arises out of an order made by HHJ Oliver on 13 February 2019 by which the judge made findings of fact against the appellant intervenor (the intervenor) in care proceedings concerning a child, P, who was born on 12 October 2015. The intervenor is the former fiance of P’s mother (the mother). The intervenor seeks an order whereby the challenged findings are substituted by an amended threshold document limited in its terms to matters in respect of which he has, consistently throughout the proceedings, made admissions.’

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1346

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.640104

Re Angela Roddy (a child) (identification: restriction on publication), Torbay Borough Council v News Group Newspapers: FD 2 Dec 2003

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.’

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 2927 (Fam), [2004] 1 FCR 30, [2004] 2 FLR 949, [2004] EMLR 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

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 – E v Channel Four, News International Ltd and St Helens Borough Council FD 1-Jun-2005
The applicant sought an order restraining publication by the defendants of material, saying she did not have capacity to consent to the publication. She suffered a multiple personality disorder. She did herself however clearly wish the film to be . .
Cited – A Local Authority v W L W T and R; In re W (Children) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) FD 14-Jul-2005
An application was made by a local authority to restrict publication of the name of a defendant in criminal proceedings in order to protect children in their care. The mother was accused of having assaulted the second respondent by knowingly . .
Cited – 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: . .
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 – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 17-Nov-2006
There had been care proceedings following allegations of physical child abuse. There had been a residential assessment. The professionals accepted the parents’ commitment to their son, but also found that they were unreliable. It was recommended . .
Cited – Brown v HM Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother, the Executors of the Estate of and others FD 5-Jul-2007
The plaintiff sought the unsealing of the wills of the late Queen Mother and of the late Princess Margaret, claiming that these would assist him establishing that he was the illegitimate son of the latter.
Held: The application was frivolous. . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Corporation v CAFCASS Legal and others FD 30-Mar-2007
Parents of a child had resisted care proceedings, and now wished the BBC to be able to make a TV programme about their case. They applied to the court for the judgment to be released. Applications were also made to have a police officer’s and . .
Cited – Ferdinand v MGN Limited QBD 29-Sep-2011
The claimant, a famous footballer, complained that an article by the defendant relating an affair he had had, had infringed his right to privacy. The defendant relied on its right to freedom of expression. The claimant had at an earlier stage, and . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.194858

Re EV (A Child): SC 1 Mar 2017

Appeal from application for permanence order. EV had been in care from her birth. Her parents, each with long standing learning difficulties opposed the order.
Held: The Court allowed the parents’ appeals. The meeting of the threshold test was a question for the judge as a fact for him to find. He was exercising more than a supervisory role over the local authority. A finding as to the future likelihood of harm could not be made solely on allegations or suspicions, but instead required facts established on a balance of probabilities.
Held: The appeal was allowed. ‘It is entirely understandable that the Second Division should have sought to avoid further delay in determining the future of this young child. Nevertheless, with the greatest respect, the Lord Ordinary’s opinion did not provide a satisfactory basis for the Inner House to grant the application itself. In relying on the Lord Ordinary’s opinion to justify the conclusion that the threshold test had been met and that a permanence order should be made, the Second Division rendered their conclusion vulnerable to some of the same criticisms as his opinion. It involved taking account of unproved allegations of criminal conduct, contrary to the guidance given in In re J, which it is now conceded should be followed when applying the Scottish legislation. It involved finding that the threshold test was satisfied without clearly explaining what exactly the apprehended detriment was, why it was considered serious, and why it was considered likely (a ‘risk’ of serious detriment not being enough). It involved no consideration of the child’s racial origin and cultural and linguistic background, to which the court is required by statute to have regard. It involved the same failure as the Lord Ordinary’s opinion to explain satisfactorily why a permanence order should be made, on the basis of a reasoned analysis of the available options and an assessment of their respective pros and cons.’

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 15, 2017 Fam LR 34, 2017 GWD 8-114, 2017 SC (UKSC) 67, UKSC 2016/0220

Links:

Bailii, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 12/01/17 am Video, SC 12/01/17 pm Video

Statutes:

Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – In re J (Children) SC 20-Feb-2013
The mother had been, whilst in a previous relationship, involved in care proceedings after the death from physical abuse of her baby. Whilst being severely critical of her, the court had been unable to identify the author of the child’s death. Now, . .
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 – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
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 – 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 . .
Cited – TW and JW v Aberdeenshire Council SCS 5-Apr-2012
(Extra Division) The court rejected an argument that sections 84(3) and (4) had a particular core status. It said that subsections (3), (4) and (5) impose separate requirements, all of which have a bearing on whether a permanence order should be . .
Cited – Re B (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Threshold Criteria) SC 12-Jun-2013
B had been removed into care at birth. The parents now appealed against a care order made with a view to B’s adoption. The Court was asked as to the situation where the risks were necessarily only anticipated, and as to appeals against a finding of . .
Appeal from – West Lothian Council v MB and KV SCS 20-Jul-2016
(Second Division, Inner House) The primary source of the local authority’s concerns in relation to the child arose from what the Lord Ordinary described as ‘perceived concerns about the behaviour of [the father]’. The first concern, of particular . .
Cited – KR v Stirling Council SCS 24-May-2016
The Court discussed the tests in section 83 for the granting of authority for adoption. They include a requirement that the court must be satisfied that the child has been, or is likely to be, placed for adoption.
Lord Drummond Young stated: . .
Cited – TW and JW v Aberdeenshire Council SCS 5-Apr-2012
(Extra Division) The court rejected an argument that sections 84(3) and (4) had a particular core status. It said that subsections (3), (4) and (5) impose separate requirements, all of which have a bearing on whether a permanence order should be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.577935

West Lothian Council v MB and KV: SCS 20 Jul 2016

(Second Division, Inner House) The primary source of the local authority’s concerns in relation to the child arose from what the Lord Ordinary described as ‘perceived concerns about the behaviour of [the father]’. The first concern, of particular importance to the local authority, related to ‘criminal charges of alleged sexual conduct . . brought in England in 2010’. The Lord Ordinary did not explain what those charges were. Whatever they may have been, they were dropped within a short period of being made, because the complainant had given inconsistent and contradictory accounts. The police did not pass the case to the Crown Prosecution Service. It appears that the complainant was a vulnerable female person who suffered from learning difficulties. According to the father’s affidavit, she was a friend of his who had wanted to have a sexual relationship with him. He had not been interested. She then made allegations to the police that he had raped her. This court has been informed that they were both aged about 19 at the time. The Lord Ordinary narrates that he heard evidence from a police officer that the father had given a statement in which he accepted that he had had consensual sex with the complainant. The father also gave evidence before the Lord Ordinary. He accepted that he had said what was recorded in the statement, but denied that it was true.
Having narrated this evidence, and expressed reservations about the evidence given by the father in relation to this matter, the Lord Ordinary stated: ‘In these circumstances it appears to me to be established on the balance of probabilities that the concerns harboured by the petitioners in relation to the [father’s]’s sexual proclivities were justified. In arriving at that conclusion I should make it clear that I am making no finding in relation to whether or not the sexual allegations made in 2010 were true or not. The relevancy or otherwise of these allegations is not a matter for me, nor have I heard any evidence in relation to the relevancy of these matters. My finding is confined to concluding that, notwithstanding the lack of any criminal conviction, there was material available to the petitioners at the time of the child EV’s birth relative to the [father]’s behaviour towards vulnerable females which they could not ignore and were required to have consideration of when formulating a policy or plan towards the ongoing care of the child EV.’

Judges:

Lady Dorrian, Lord Justice Clerk

Citations:

[2016] ScotCS CSIH – 60, 2016 Fam LR 134, 2017 SCLR 304, 2016 GWD 25-463

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Appeal from – Re EV (A Child) SC 1-Mar-2017
Appeal from application for permanence order. EV had been in care from her birth. Her parents, each with long standing learning difficulties opposed the order.
Held: The Court allowed the parents’ appeals. The meeting of the threshold test was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.568782

In re T (A Child: contact): CA 24 Oct 2002

The court considered an appeal in care proceedings, where it was felt that the judge’s reasons for his findings were inadequately set out. Arden LJ pointed out that the principles in Emery Reimbold applied also in care proceedings, and set out counsel’s duties on receiving what might be a deficient draft judgment: ‘In a complex case, it might well be prudent, and certainly not out of place, for the judge, having handed down or delivered judgment, to ask the advocates whether there are any matters which he has not covered. Even if he does not, as a matter of courtesy at least, to draw the judge’s attention to any material omission of which he is then aware or then believes exists. It is well-established that it is open to a judge to amend his judgment, if he thinks fit, at any time up to the drawing of the order. In many cases, the advocate ought to raise the matter with the judge in pursuance of his duty to assist the court to achieve the overriding objective (CPR 1.3, which does not as such apply to these proceedings); and in some cases, it may follow from the advocate’s duty not to mislead the court that he should raise the matter rather than allow the order to be drawn. It would be unsatisfactory to use an omission by a judge to deal with a point in a judgment as grounds for an application for appeal if the matter has not been brought to the judge’s attention when there was a ready opportunity so to do. Unnecessary costs and delay may result. I should make it clear that there are general observations for assistance in future cases, and that I make no criticisms of counsel in this case’.

Judges:

Thorpe, Rix, Arden LJJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1736, [2003] 1 FLR 531, [2003] 1 FCR 303

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd; etc, (Practice Note) CA 30-Apr-2002
Judge’s Reasons Must Show How Reached
In each case appeals were made, following Flannery, complaining of a lack of reasons given by the judge for his decision.
Held: Human Rights jurisprudence required judges to put parties into a position where they could understand how the . .

Cited by:

Cited – J K Bansi v Alpha Flight Services EAT 3-Feb-2004
EAT Redundancy – Collective consultation and information. Serota QC J said: ‘In English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd . . the Court of Appeal gave guidance as to the circumstances in which a Judge might be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.282654

A (Area of Freedom, Security And Justice): ECJ 29 Jan 2009

ECJ Area of Freedom, Security And Justice – Opinion – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility – Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 – Definition of civil matters Jurisdiction over decisions on parental responsibility – Habitual residence of a child Provisional measures.
A family had originally lived in Finland but then moved to live in Sweden. Some years later, they travelled to Finland in a camper van, originally for the holidays, moving from campsite to campsite and the children did not go to school. But in October the parents applied to the Finnish authorities for social housing. So were the children habitually resident in Finland?
Held: Advocate General Kokott stressed that habitual residence had to be distinguished from mere presence, and also from ‘the legalistic concept of domicile’. She proposed that it should correspond to ‘the actual centre of interests of the child’; the court should take account of all factors present when it was seised of the case; the duration and regularity of residence and the child’s familial and social integration may be particularly significant.

Judges:

Kokott AG

Citations:

C-523/07, [2009] EUECJ C-523/07 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – A (Area of Freedom, Security and Justice) ECJ 2-Apr-2009
ECJ Judicial co-operation in civil matters – Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility – Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280397

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 parent rather than the other: what will matter is the relationship which L has with her parents, and her capacity to understand and engage in mutually satisfying adult relationships. If she is given a distorted view of adult relationships by her parents, her own view of them will be distorted, and her own relationships with others – particularly with members of the opposite sex – will be damaged.’

Judges:

Wall, Aikens LJJ, Bennett J

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 20, [2009] 1 FLR 1157, [2009] 1 FCR 584, [2009] Fam Law 294, [2009] 2 All ER 700

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 11(7)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Payne v Payne; P v P CA 13-Feb-2001
No presumption for Mother on Relocation
The mother applied for leave to return to New Zealand taking with the parties’ daughter aged four. The father opposed the move, saying that allowing the move would infringe his and the child’s right to family life. He had been refused residence.

Cited by:

Cited – In re F (Children) CA 27-Oct-2010
The mother appealed against refusal of a specific issue order requested to allow her to remove the four children with her from Cleveland to Stronsay in the Orkneys. Both parents were GPs and accepted to be excellent parents. She and her new partner . .
Cited – C (A Child), Re Misc 11-May-2012
Romford County Court – C, a girl aged 10 and a half wished to be baptised a christian. Her Jewish parents, were now separated, and her father had converted. The mother refused, and all four grandparents opposed. The father said that C was a bright . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280168

A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon: CA 18 Dec 2008

The court declined appeals against findings that local authorities through social workers could properly assess whether the claimants were under eighteen and entitled, though asylum seekers, to housing provision and support under the 1989 Act.

Judges:

Ward, maurice Kay LJJ, Sir John Chadwick

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1445, [2009] PTSR 1011, [2009] ACD 17, [2009] LGR 24, [2009] Fam Law 290, [2009] 1 FLR 1325, [2009] BLGR 24, [2009] 1 FCR 317

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 20(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – M and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Lambeth and others Admn 20-Jun-2008
The claimant had arrived from Afhganistan and sought asylum and accomodation as a child. The social worker involved assessed him to be an adult.
Held: The decision was within the duties of the local authorities. . .
Cited – M, Regina (on the Application of) v Gateshead Council CA 14-Mar-2006
The applicant had left care, but still received assistance. She was arrested and the police asked the attending social worker to arrange secure accommodation overnight. The respondent refused. The court was asked what duty (if any) is owed by local . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Children, Human Rights

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.279991

In re E (A Minor) (Care Order: Contract): CA 1994

The court considered the benefits to a child of continuing parental contact while the child remained in care.
Simon Brown LJ said: ‘I recognise of course that the threshold criteria for a care order under section 31 of the 1989 Act require the court to be satisfied that a child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm attributable to inadequate parenting and that that inadequacy would normally be attributable to the quality of the parent/child relationship. Nevertheless, although the value of contact may be limited by the parents’ inadequacy, it may still be of fundamental importance to the long-term welfare of the child, unless of course it can be seen that in a given case it will inevitably disturb the child’s care. In short, even when the section 31 criteria are satisfied, contact may well be of singular importance to the long-term welfare of the child: first, in giving the child the security of knowing that his parents love him and are interested in his welfare; secondly, by avoiding any damaging sense of loss to the child in seeing himself abandoned by his parents; thirdly, by enabling the child to commit himself to the substitute family with the seal of approval of the natural parents; and, fourthly, by giving the child the necessary sense of family and personal identity. Contact, if maintained, is capable of reinforcing and increasing the chances of success of a permanent placement, whether on a long-term fostering basis or by adoption.’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

[1994] 1 FLR 146

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Down Lisburn Health and Social Services Trust and Another v H and Another HL 12-Jul-2006
The House considered when adoption law would allow an adoption without the consent of the birth parent where there had been some continuing contact between that parent and the child.
Held: (Baroness Hale dissenting) The appeal against the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.243094

Regina v Harrow London Borough Council ex parte D: 1990

The court discussed the legal status of the Child Protection Register. Butler-Sloss LJ: ‘The case conference has a duty to make an assessment as to abuse and the abuser, if sufficient information is available. Of its nature, the mechanism of the case conference leading to the decision to place names on the register and the decision-making process, is unstructured and informal. It is accepted by Mr Scrivener that it is not a judicial process. It is part of a protection package for a child believed to have been the victim of abuse. Unlike other areas of judicial review, the considerations are not limited to the individual who may have been prejudiced and the tribunal or organisation being criticised. In this field, unusually, there is a third component of enormous importance – the welfare of the child which is the purpose of the entry in the register. In proceedings in which the child is the subject, his or her welfare is paramount.
In balancing adequate protection for the child and fairness to an adult, the interest of an adult may have to be placed second to the needs of the child. All concerned in this difficult and delicate area should be allowed to perform their task without looking over their shoulder all the time for the possible intervention of the court.’ and
‘The nature of the information recorded, the machinery by which it has been inserted and the limited purpose for which it is included must be recognised. Having said that, I do not consider such an entry is in any way a finding of fact, even less a finding of guilt, nor should it be seen as such.’

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

[1990] Fam 133

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Local Government, Children

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.242942

X v Netherlands: ECHR 1974

(Comission) A child asserted her right to live where she pleased.
Held: The state has an obligation to provide for its children to live with their parents in normal circumstances: ‘As a general proposition, and in the absence of any special circumstances, the obligation of children to reside with their parents and to be otherwise subjected to particular control is necessary for the protection of children’s health and morals although it might constitute, from a particular child’s point of view, an interference with his or her own private life’.

Citations:

(1974) 2 DR 118

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 88

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Axon, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another Admn 23-Jan-2006
A mother sought to challenge guidelines issued by the respondent which would allow doctors to protect the confidentiality of women under 16 who came to them for assistance even though the sexual activities they might engage in would be unlawful.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.238337