Category: Children

Re S: FC 29 Aug 2014

F sought to extend the time for appeal and to appeal against the decisions of the Magistrates to make a final Care Order and to make a Placement Order in respect of his son.

Judges:

Hudson HHJ

Citations:

[2014] EWFC B154

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Adoption

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.540377

Re: L (Contact: Genuine Fear): FD 2002

The Court had to consider a mother’s total opposition to any contact between a child and his father. It was compelled to reach a decision with reluctance that the mother’s phobic disorder, not based on rational thinking, nevertheless was of such genuineness and intensity that to order contact would cause the child marked emotional harm. He would be exposed to the emotional effect on the mother which would be profound and possibly de-stabilising.

Judges:

Bruce Blair QC

Citations:

[2002] 1 FLR 621

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A and D v B and E FD 13-Jun-2003
In two separate actions, fathers with parental responsibility sought orders requiring the mothers of their children to ensure they received the MMR vaccine. Each mother objected, having suspicions as to the safety of the treatment. Specific issue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.185659

In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental Rights); In re F (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights): FD 13 Jun 2003

In each case fathers not married to the mother of the child, but with parental responsibility sought to have the child immunised. The mothers opposed the treatment saying they believed it unsafe.
Held: The children should be immunised. Article 8.2 permitted interference with family life for health reasons. Mothers and fathers had equal rights before the court, and the court should be reluctant to intervene. The medical evidence was clear and persuasive. Acknowledging the mothers fears, age appropriate vaccination was in the child’s best interests. This was not a general approval of immunisation for children.

Judges:

Sumner J

Citations:

Times 26-Jun-2003, Gazette 14-Aug-2003

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 8, European Convention on Human Rights 8.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights); In re F (a Child) (Imminisation: Parental rights) CA 30-Jul-2003
In two actions heard together, single mothers resisted attempts to have their children immunised at the behest of the fathers, who in each case had parental responsibility.
Held: A one-parent carer did not have the freedom to make such a . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights); In re F (a Child) (Imminisation: Parental rights) CA 30-Jul-2003
In two actions heard together, single mothers resisted attempts to have their children immunised at the behest of the fathers, who in each case had parental responsibility.
Held: A one-parent carer did not have the freedom to make such a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.184024

P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public): FD 2003

The applicant sought a joint residence order, and for a declaration that the rules preventing such hearings being in public breached the requirement for a public hearing.
Held: Both FPR 1991 rule 4.16(7) and section 97 are compatible with the fair trial provisions of Article 61) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Judges:

Bennett J

Citations:

[2003] 3 FCR 523, [2003] EWHC 1541 (Fam), [2004] 1 FLR 171

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1, Children Act 1989 97, Family Proceedings Rules 1991 4.16(7)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – P-B (a Minor) (child cases: hearings in open court) CA 20-Jun-1996
The applicant sought to have his application for a residence order heard in open court: ‘Article 6 (1) provides for the public hearing and the public pronouncement of judgment of cases, but with the proviso of exclusion of the press and the public . .
Cited – Clibbery v Allan and Another FD 2-Jul-2001
There is nothing inherently different in Family Division proceedings to justify an implied ban on all disclosures of matters proceeding in chambers. Here no children or other sensitive matters were involved. The simple filing of an affidavit . .
Cited – Allan v Clibbery (1) CA 30-Jan-2002
Save in cases involving children and ancillary and other situations requiring it, cases in the family division were not inherently private. The appellant failed to obtain an order that details of an action under the section should not be disclosed . .

Cited by:

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 – 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 – 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 . .
Appeal from – Pelling v Bruce-Williams, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening CA 5-Jul-2004
The applicant sought an order that his application for a joint residence order should be held in public.
Held: Though there was some attractiveness in the applicant’s arguments, the issue had been fully canvassed by the ECHR. The time had come . .
Cited – Child X (Residence and Contact- Rights of Media Attendance) (Rev 2) FD 14-Jul-2009
The father applied to the court to have the media excluded from the hearing into the residence and contact claims relating to his daughter.
Held: It was for the party seeking such an order to justify it. In deciding whether or not to exclude . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.188859

In re K (Children): CA 21 Jul 2005

The father sought permission to appeal an order refusing him direct contact with his chidren.
Held: It would be difficult to disturb an order carefully made in a judge’s discretion. Nevertheless the order was of substantial effect, and the father should be allowed to continue.

Judges:

Wall LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1094

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.230027

Ford, Regina (on the Application Of) v Inland Revenue: Admn 19 May 2005

Payment of child benefit where parents shared care.
Held: Where there was morethan one child, HMRC has a discretion to decide who should have it, without any statutory test (Sched 10, para 5 of the 1992 Act), and may, therefore, allocate the benefit for one child to one household and for another child to the other.

Judges:

Richards J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1109 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 141

Cited by:

Cited – Humphreys v Revenue and Customs SC 16-May-2012
Separated parents shared the care of their child. The father complained that all the Child Tax Credit was given to the mother.
Held: The appeal failed. Although the rule does happen to be indirectly discriminatory against fathers, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, Children

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.226278

M (Children) (Contact Order): CA 11 Apr 2005

Where a contemnor sould be fined but would be unable to pay a fine at the level thought appropriate, that was not a good reason to impose imprisonment.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 615, [2005] 2 FLR 1006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 14.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Crystal Mews Ltd v Metterick and Others ChD 13-Nov-2006
The court considered the punishment on finding contempt proved for breach of a freezing order: ‘In contempt cases the object of the penalty is both to punish conduct in defiance of the court’s order as well as serving a coercive function by holding . .
Cited – Aspect Capital Ltd v Christensen ChD 29-Mar-2010
The defendant, a former senior employee had appeared dishonest and been dismissed. A search and seizure order was obtained, and the claimant now said that the defendant was in contempt of it. The parties disputed the extent of his admissions of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Contempt of Court

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.226140

In Re R (Parental responsibility: IVF baby); D (A Child), Re: HL 12 May 2005

The parents had received IVF treatment together, but had separated before the child was born. The mother resisted an application by the father for a declaration of paternity.
Held: The father’s appeal failed. The Act made statutory provision as to the parentage of a child born through IVF. The mere participation of the father and consent at the early stage of treatment was not sufficient to count as participating in the treatment. He had not himself received any treatment. The mother had only told of her separation from the father and of her new relationship after the last and successful treatment. Whilst procedures might be tightened up, there was no effective safeguard against fraud. Lord Hope: ‘the question whether the treatment services were being provided for the woman and the man together at the relevant time simply raises a question of fact which must be determined by the judge in the light of all the evidence. The perspective of the clients is therefore to be treated as part of the relevant evidence. So too is the perspective of the provider of the services, as demonstrated by the records which the provider has kept as required by the licensing authority. Neither has any priority over the other in terms of the statute. Each is as vulnerable to human error, deceit, mistake or misunderstanding as the other. To elevate one over the other when the statute does not clearly require this would be to create an unnecessary gloss.’

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe

Citations:

[2005] UKHL 33, [2005] 2 WLR 1158, [2005] 2 AC 621, [2005] 4 All ER 433, [2005] 2 FCR 223

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Family Law Reform Act 1987 27, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 27(1) 28(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – U v W (Attorney-General Intervening) FD 4-Mar-1997
The restriction on the freedom to provide human fertility treatment to licensees of the Authority was not a breach of the EU treaty. There is a particular need for certainty in provisions affecting the status of a child. There is a mental element . .
Cited – The Ampthill Peerage Case HL 1977
There was a dispute about the legitimacy of an heir to the title. New evidence had been discovered after the trial.
Held: The House considered whether a new trial of an action might be ordered after discovery of new evidence: ‘The law knows, . .
Appeal from – In re R (Parental responsibility: IVF baby) CA 19-Feb-2003
The mother and father of the child were not married, but had consented to the terms of their infertility treatment. The father donated his sperm, but the mother was only inseminated after they had separated. The mother appealed a declaration of . .
Cited – Quintavalle v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority HL 28-Apr-2005
The parents of a boy suffering a serious genetic disorder sought IVF treament in which any embryo would be tested for its pre-implantation genetic status. Only an embryo capable of producing the stem cells necessary to cure the boy would be . .
Appeal from (second level) – B and D v R FD 22-Feb-2002
The parties were unmarried but entered into IVF treatment together. They separated, but the mother continued with treatment, not telling the IVF center of the breakdown of the first relationship, and nor of her new relationship until after the . .
Cited – Re B (Parentage) FD 1996
A mother applied for financial provision for her twin children under 1989 Act Sch 1. The father asked whether he was their parent within the Schedule. They had been born by artificial insemination. He accepted that he was the donor of the sperm and . .
Cited – Quintavalle, Regina (on the Application of) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority CA 16-May-2003
A licence was sought so that a couple could have a child who would be tissue typed to establish his suitability to provide an umbilical cord after his birth to help treat his future brother. A licence had been granted subject to conditions, and the . .

Cited by:

Cited – AB v CD FD 24-May-2013
The Applicant AB, a lesbian woman aged 37, applied for contact to twin boys, E and F, aged 3. In making that application, she described herself as the boys’ ‘parent’; she ws so defined on the boys’ birth certificates. For the first 17 months of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224853

Studd v Cook: HL 8 May 1883

Process – Appeal – Expenses – Parent and Child – Obligation of Parent who had Raised Action against his Pupil Children to Provide Funds to Enable their Curator ad litem to Defend Judgment of Court of Session.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor, Lords Watson and Fitzgerald

Citations:

[1883] UKHL 566, 20 SLR 566

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Children

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.636762

Purrucker v Valles Perez: ECJ 20 May 2010

EU (Opinion) Area Of Freedom, Security And Justice – Recognition and enforcement of judgments in matters of parental responsibility Provisional measures Custody.

Citations:

C-256/09, [2010] EUECJ C-256/09 – O

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Purrucker v Valles Perez (No 1) ECJ 15-Jul-2010
ECJ (Judgment) Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in the matters of parental responsibility – Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 – . .
See Also – Purrucker v Valles Perez (No 2) ECJ 9-Nov-2010
Area Of Freedom, Security And Justice – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility – Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 – Lis pendens – . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.416435

A (a child), A (Children): CA 27 Jul 2005

Renewed application by a guardian in care proceedings for permission to appeal. The guardian complained that the judge had taken matters too quickly, not allowing him to develop his arguments or to address the welfare checklist. Leave given.

Judges:

Wall J, Black J

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1093

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.230025

In re T (A Child), (Order for Costs): CA 21 Mar 2005

The court re-affirmed what were described as the ‘well-established principles’ relating to costs in private law applications.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 311, [2005] 2 FLR 681

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – D and D W v Portsmouth Hospital NHS; in re W (A Child) CA 3-May-2006
The claimants had sought court orders against the hospital to secure continuing life-supporting treatment for their daughter who had been born very severely disabled. The Trust now sought their costs from the various actions.
Held: The parents . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Costs

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223781

R v R (Costs: Child Case); In re R (a Minor): CA 5 Dec 1996

The court analysed the reasons why costs orders were generally not made in cases involving children.

Judges:

Hale J, Staughton LJ

Citations:

[1997] 1 FCR 613, [1997] 2 FLR 95, [1996] EWCA Civ 1120, [1997] Fam Law 391

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .
Cited – In re T (Children) SC 25-Jul-2012
The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Children

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223259

Re G (Children): CA 14 Sep 2001

‘Mrs S is the maternal aunt of three children E, born in 1992; S, born in 1993 and T born in 1997 to her sister, who sadly has a history of mental illness. The only issue that I have to review this morning is the management of an application which she made for leave to apply under the Children Act 1998 for orders in respect of residence and/or contact. That leave was necessary because she falls without that band of persons who have a right of application by statute. ‘

Judges:

Thorpe LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1433

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222975

Re U (A Child): CA 24 Feb 2005

The applicant sought a second appeal saying there was fresh evidence.
Held: Applying Taylor -v- Lawrence, a second appeal could only be entertained where it was shown that the earlier judicial process had been critically undermined. It must be shown at least that there was a powerful possibility that an erroneous result had in fact been perpetrated. That test might be met where it was shown that the process was corrupted. It was not met only where it was shown that a wrong result might have been arrived at. Neither situation applied here, and the application was misconceived in principle.
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P siad:
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P said: ‘ In our judgment it must at least be shown, not merely that the fresh evidence demonstrates a real possibility that an erroneous result was arrived at in the earlier proceedings (first instance or appellate), but that there exists a powerful probability that such a result has in fact been perpetrated. That, in our view, is a necessary but by no means a sufficient condition for a successful application under CPR 52.17(1). It is to be remembered that apart from the requirement of no alternative remedy, ‘[t]he effect of reopening the appeal on others and the extent to which the complaining party is the author of his own misfortune will also be important considerations’ (Taylor v Lawrence, 547). Earlier we stated that the Taylor v Lawrence jurisdiction can only be properly invoked where it is demonstrated that the integrity of the earlier litigation process, whether at trial or at the first appeal, has been critically undermined. That test will generally be met where the process has been corrupted. It may be met where it is shown that a wrong result was earlier arrived at. It will not be met where it is shown only that a wrong result may have been arrived at.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Laws The President Lord Justice Thorp

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 52, [2005] 1 WLR 2398, [2005] 2 FLR 444, [2005] Fam Law 449, [2005] 1 FCR 583, [2005] 3 All ER 550

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Taylor v Lawrence CA 4-Feb-2002
A party sought to re-open a judgment on the Court of Appeal after it had been perfected. A case had been tried before a judge. One party had asked for a different judge to be appointed, after the judge disclosed that he had been a client of the firm . .

Cited by:

Cited – Business Environment Bow Lane Ltd v Deanwater Estates Ltd ChD 31-Jul-2009
The court was asked ‘Where a claimant has picked up one or more costs orders in its favour on the way to a trial, but fails very badly at the trial (for example due to exaggeration), can the costs judge assess those costs at nil on the footing that . .
Cited – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) SC 29-Jun-2016
Undisclosed Matter inadequate to revisit decision
The claimant sought to have set aside a decision of the House of Lords as to the validity of the 2004 Order, saying that it had been based on a failure by the defendant properly to disclose matters it was under a duty of candour to disclose.
Cited – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2) SC 29-Jun-2016
Undisclosed Matter inadequate to revisit decision
The claimant sought to have set aside a decision of the House of Lords as to the validity of the 2004 Order, saying that it had been based on a failure by the defendant properly to disclose matters it was under a duty of candour to disclose.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222953

Clarke v Carfin Coal Co: HL 27 Jul 1891

Reparation – Parent and Child – Action for Damages for Death of Illegitimate Child – Title to Sue.
A woman sued a company for damages for the loss, by the fault of the defenders, of her illegitimate son, who was fourteen years of age. The respondents, founding on the illegitimacy of the son, pleaded no title to sue.
Held ( aff. the decision of the Second Division) that the pursuer had no title to sue.

Judges:

Earl of Selborne, and Lords Watson, Macnaghten, and Morris

Citations:

[1891] UKHL 950 – 1, 28 SLR 950 – 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Children

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.636778

AB v AB (Child : Enforcement of Foreign Order : Algeria): FD 3 Jul 2015

Application by the father for an order that RB should move to live in Algeria and for a stay of the mother’s proceedings in England. It is not an order for the return of the child to Algeria because, since her birth, the child has always lived in England and has never lived in Algeria. It is, in effect, an application for a summary relocation order. The application is made under the court’s inherent jurisdiction.

Judges:

Moylan J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 2422 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.554071

In re E (A Child): CA 22 Nov 2012

Where a minor is accommodated voluntarily under Section 20 of the Children Act 1989, is the court prevented by Section 100 of the same Act from making the child a ward of court?

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1773

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.470113

In re G (A Child): CA 29 Nov 2000

Judges:

Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P, Laws, Hale LJJ

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 504, [2001] 1 FLR 872, [2001] 1 FCR 165

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – In re G (A Child) CA 20-Jun-2000
G had died. It was then discovered that he had suffered serious abuse before his death (though not actually causing it). M, wanting the return of her other child, now appealed from a fact finding judgment which had failed to identify which of them . .
Cited – Kent County Council v G and others HL 24-Nov-2005
A residential assessment order had been made under the 1989 Act in care proceedings. When the centre recommended a second extension of the assessment, the council refused, saying that the true purpose was not the assessment of the child but the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.235324

In re G (A Child): CA 20 Jun 2000

G had died. It was then discovered that he had suffered serious abuse before his death (though not actually causing it). M, wanting the return of her other child, now appealed from a fact finding judgment which had failed to identify which of them was responsible.
Held: ‘the judge gave an impeccable self-direction. She recognised the convenience of coming to a clear conclusion, but, in conscientiously weighing up the evidence, she came to a conclusion which she appreciated was unpalatable, that the evidence was not sufficient on the balance of probabilities to exclude the mother and positively, on the balance of probabilities, to identify the father.
In my judgment, there is no merit in the question of law and the judge did not err in her self direction or in her application of the standard of proof to the case with which she was dealing.’

Judges:

Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 503, [2001] 1 FCR 97, [2001] 1 FCR 97

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – In re G (A Child) CA 29-Nov-2000
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Kent County Council v G and others HL 24-Nov-2005
A residential assessment order had been made under the 1989 Act in care proceedings. When the centre recommended a second extension of the assessment, the council refused, saying that the true purpose was not the assessment of the child but the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.235323

Regina v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust (ex parte Glass): CA 21 Jul 1999

The courts can not intervene between a parent and her child’s doctors to control future medical care of the child. Such decisions must be made as they presented themselves. In such cases the child’s best interests took precedence over strict legalistic procedures. The court has power to give appropriate remedies even though an incorrect procedures may have been followed. The general rule is that Declarations should be sought and considered in the light of circumstances as they are and not as they may be. Any departure from that approach would have to be justified.

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR

Citations:

Times 26-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1914, [1999] 2 FLR 905, [1999] Lloyd’s Rep Med 367, [1999] 3 FCR 145, (1999) 11 Admin LR 991, (1999) 50 BMLR 269, [1999] Fam Law 696

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust ex parte Glass Admn 22-Apr-1999
Application with regard to continuation or otherwise of life saving treatment for a child. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wyatt v Portsmouth NHS Trust and Another FD 21-Apr-2005
Charlotte Wyatt had been born very premature and so severely disabled that her doctors sought and obtained an order that she should not be revived if she died. She had survived several months longer than expected and her parents had noticed . .
Appeal from – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Children

Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.146829

In re S (A Child): CA 5 Nov 2002

Father’s application for permission to appeal orders in relation to his daughter J, that J should live with her mother, that there be no order about her contact with her father

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1695

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.217862

Addison and Another (t/a Brayton News) v Ashby: EAT 17 Jan 2003

The applicant was a 15 year old paper boy. He sought holiday pay under the regulations. The employer resisted, saying he was not a worker under the regulation, being still in compulsory full time education.
Held: No formal system of holidays operated. Children were not explicitly excluded from the Working Time Directive, but were rather dealt with under the Young Persons’ Directive. The Working Time Regulations defined two kinds of workers by age, implicitly excluding children in compulsory full time education. The arrangements for such were rather provided by regulations derived from the Young Person’s Directive, and which did not include a right to holiday pay.

Judges:

Burke QC, Dawson and MacArthur

Citations:

Times 24-Jan-2003, [2003] UKEAT 0851 – 01 – 1701, [2003] All ER (D) 98, [2003] ICR 667, [2003] IRLR 211

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Working Times Regulations 1998 (1998 No 1833) 2, Working Time Directive (93/104/EEC), Young Persons Directive (94/33/EC)5 11, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 18 30(1), Children (Protection at Work) Regulations 1998 (1998 No 276)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Children, European

Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.178773