Category: Children

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.

Judges:

Mr Justice Wall

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 142 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 D v D (Children) (Shared Residence Orders) CA 20-Nov-2000
Three children, after their parents’ separation, spent substantial amounts of time with each, despite the acrimony between their parents and frequent court applications. The father argued that without a shared residence order he was treated as a . .
Cited – Re A (Children) (Shared Residence) CA 2002
There were three children, a boy and two girls. The girls lived with their mother and the boy lived with his father. The boy was unwilling to see his mother, and was not doing so. The father appealed a shared residence order in her favour.
Cited – Re F (Shared Residence Order) CA 2003
A shared residence order had been made for two small children, even though the parents lived a considerable distance apart.
Held: The decision was correct. The distance did not prevent dividing the children’s year between the two homes. A . .
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 – Re P (Section 91(14) Guidelines) CA 1999
. .

Cited by:

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

Children

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.192628

E (BIIa: Recognition and Enforcement): CA 4 Aug 2020

his appeal concerns the extent of the obligation upon the court in England and Wales to enforce a foreign order in relation to children. It directly concerns one provision of the Brussels II revised Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No. 2201/2003) (‘BIIa’) but the underlying principles are of broad application in cases where the court is faced with an enforcement application alongside a welfare application.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Jackson

Citations:

[2020] EWCA Civ 1030, [2020] WLR(D) 463

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, International

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.657109

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 every case is to treat the welfare of the child or children concerned as paramount, and to safeguard and promote the welfare of every child to the best of its ability. Unless there are cogent reasons against it, the children of separated parents are entitled to know and have the love and society of both their parents. In particular, the courts recognise the vital importance of the role of non-resident fathers in the lives of their children, and only make orders terminating contact when there is no alternative.’

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 18, [2004] 1 FCR 439,

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Children

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.192336

Re G: CA 11 Apr 2001

Judges:

Ward L.J

Citations:

(unreported) 11 April 2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A v The London Borough of Lambeth Admn 25-May-2001
The applicant was mother of three children, two of whom were autistic. She sought re-housing from the defendant. It was claimed that s17 imposed a specific duty on the authority, having identified a child’s needs, in this case for re-housing, to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.182958

In re S (A Child: Abduction): CA 27 Nov 2002

M’s appeal from refusal of order for return of a child under the Hague Convention.

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Scott Baker, Munby JJ

Citations:

[2003] 1 FCR 235, [2003] 1 FLR 1008, [2003] Fam Law 298, [2002] EWCA Civ 1941

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188973

Kenny, Regina (on the Application of) v Leeds Magistrates Court, Leeds City Council: Admn 5 Dec 2003

In cases involving children, Article 3 provides that the best interests of the child are a primary consideration, not the primary consideration.
The court looked at the test for making an interim ASBO: ‘Consideration of whether it is just to make an order without notice is necessarily a balancing exercise. The court must balance the need to protect the public against the impact that the order sought will have upon the defendant. It will need to consider the seriousness of the behaviour in issue, the urgency with which it is necessary to take steps to control such behaviour, and whether it is necessary for orders to be made without notice in order for them to be effective. On the other side of the equation it will consider the degree to which the order will impede the defendant’s rights as a free citizen to go where he pleases and to associate with whosoever he pleases.
It is submitted on behalf of the Claimants that such relief can only be granted in exceptional circumstances, and that there must be compelling urgency to justify an application without notice. In my judgment that would be an unwarranted and unnecessary gloss upon the test set out in section 1D. But it is implicit in the balancing exercise that the considerations that weigh in favour of injunctive relief must be sufficiently serious to warrant what may amount to a serious interference with the civil rights of a defendant.’

Judges:

Owen J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 2963 (Admin), [2004] 1 All ER 1333

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 1D, European Convention on Human Rights 3

Cited by:

Cited – A (A Child), Regina (on the Application of) v Leeds Magistrate’s Court and Another Admn 19-Mar-2004
The father sought judicial review of an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) made in respect of his son.
Held: Although the child’s best interests remained a primary consideration when making such an order, they were not the primary . .
Cited – Manchester City Council, Regina (on the Application Of) v Manchester Magistrates’ Court Admn 8-Feb-2005
The council appealed the refusal of the magistrates to grant an interim Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) without notice. The magistrates clerk had said that there had been no violence, and no further incident after the police had given a warning. . .
Cited – Webster and Others v The Governors of the Ridgeway Foundation School QBD 21-May-2009
The first claimant had been severely beaten as he left school. He and his parents also claimed post traumatic stress. They alleged that the school had been negligent in having allowed racial tensions to develop. The claimant was white, and his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Children, Human Rights

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188532

In re M (Care Proceedings: Judicial Review); In the matter of unborn baby M R; X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire County Council: Admn 15 Apr 2003

Munby J said: ‘If a baby is to be removed from its mother, one would normally expect arrangements to be made by the local authority to facilitate contact on a regular basis . . Those arrangements must be driven by the needs of the family, not stunted by lack of resources. Typically, if this is what the parents want, one will be looking to contact most days of the week and for lengthy periods.’

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2003] 2 FLR 171, [2003] EWHC 850 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (S) v Haringey London Borough Council QBD 13-Nov-2003
The applicant sought a writ of habeas corpus in respect of her four children who had been removed by the police, and were residing with the local authority under interim care orders. She said they were held against their wills.
Held: The . .
Explained – In re S (a child) (Care proceedings: Contact) FD 5-Jul-2005
The one month old baby had been taken into the care of the local authority. The authority appealed the extent of contact with the baby.
Held: The appeal failed. It was not wholly improper to allow for the practicalities of arranging such . .
Cited – G, Regina (on the Application of) v Nottingham City Council Admn 1-Feb-2008
The respondent authority had removed the child from the mother at birth but without first obtaining any court authority. The court had made a peremptory order for the return of the child. The court explained its actions.
Held: Neither social . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Judicial Review

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188378

In re G (a Child) (Litigants in Person): CA 28 Jul 2003

The father of a child involved in a case before the court was acting in person. He wanted to seek advice from the Citizen’s Advice Bureau or the RCJ Personal Support Unit.
Held: The rules needed to be reconsidered so that a litigant in person need not each time apply to the court before disclosing papers in his case to the service providing support to such litigants. Until the rules were altered, there was no objection to a party disclosing to such services non-identifiable information for their advice.

Judges:

Elizabeth Butler-Sloss Dame, Thorpe, Rix LJJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1055, Times 31-Jul-2003, [2003] 2 FLR 963

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Proceedings 1991 (1991 1247) 4.23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – O and others (Children); In re O (Children), In re W-R (a Child), In re W (Children) CA 22-Jun-2005
In each case litigants in person had sought to be allowed to have the assistance and services of a Mackenzie friend in children cases. In one case, the court had not allowed confidential documents to be disclosed to the friend.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185821

Glasgow City Council v DH and Another: IHCS 17 Jul 2003

Exclusion orders had been sought under the Act, but refused for non-compliance with procedures under the Act. New applications were made to different courts, and the applicant said it was not open to the Authorities to make the same application again after it had been once refused.
Held: The procedure did not allow an appeal. In the circumstances, the renewed applications were not an abuse of process. An order is not concerned with achieving a permanent determination of rights and duties but with securing the protection of vulnerable persons in the light of information and advice which may change from time to time. Furthermore, the existence of time-limits for such orders, including at an interim stage, may make it difficult, if not impossible, for the same application to be kept in being until its final determination. Hence the need for a fresh application, which may or may not include additional supporting material.

Judges:

Lord President Lady Cosgrove Lord Cameron of Lochbroom

Citations:

[2003] ScotCS 202, 2003 SCLR 742

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children (Scotland) Act 1995 76 77 78 79 80

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – Magistrates of Portobello v Magistrates of Edinburgh 1882
‘where a well-known and recognised jurisdiction is invoked by the Legislature for the purpose of carrying out a series of provisions which are important for the public without any specific form of process being prescribed, the presumption is that . .
Cited – Harper v Inspector of Rutherglen 1903
Lord Trayner said: ‘Every judgment of an inferior Court is subject to review, unless such review is excluded expressly or by necessary implication’. . .
Cited – Allan and Sons Bill Posting Limited v Edinburgh Magistrates 1909
In asking whether an appeal was available, the presence or absence of a record of the decision at first instance is an indicator, since an appeal is more difficult without. . .
Cited – Allan and Sons Bill Posting Limited v Edinburgh Magistrates 1909
In asking whether an appeal was available, the presence or absence of a record of the decision at first instance is an indicator, since an appeal is more difficult without. . .
Cited – Central Regional Council v B 1985
In the absence of any specific provision forbidding or restricting appeals, the presumption was that the ordinary rules applied in respect of a summary application. Since those rules allowed appeals, the plea to the competency of an appeal from the . .
Cited – Roberton v Roberton 1999
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184669

White v White: CA 19 May 2003

The parties to the marriage owned a property which they had extended. The relationship deteriorated, and the mother sought an order under the 1996 Act. The mother left the home, and the father cared for the children. He sought orders under the 1989 Act for the transfer of the property. Those proceedings were made subject to the current proceedings.
Held: Sensible case management demands that competing applications be conjoined. The current order was wrong in principle. When the court looked at the intentions of the parties under a trust, it should look to the time before the trust, not from time to time later. The powers under each Act are not co-extensive. Unless for some special reason the application should be under both Acts and the exercise of the powers under each Act should be considered by the same court and at the same time.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lady Justice Arden, Mr Justice Bodey

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 924

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14, Children Act 1989 Sch1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Pearce v Pearce CA 28-Jul-2003
The financial claims on divorce had been settled by a compromise recorded in a court order. The order included periodical payments to the former wife. After she suffered financial losses, she sought an increase, and the former husband sought an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Trusts, Children, Land

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184446

Re R (A Child): CA 19 Feb 2003

Judges:

The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Dyson Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 182

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – AHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179580

Regina (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 29 Nov 2002

The League challenged the respondent’s statement in the Prisons’ Handbook that children held in young offender institutions were not subject to the protection of the 1989 Act.
Held: Neither the Prison Act and Rules excluded the Prison authorities from the list of those required to co-operate with local authorities in the exercise of their duties under the 1989 Act. The authorities duties continued notwithstanding the imprisonment, and therefore the Act continued to apply, in direct contradiction of the Prisons’ Handbook, but indirectly. Whether the duties were being complied with required to be assessed in the context of the treatment of a particular child. Munby J said: ‘human rights law imposes on the Prison Service enforceable obligations, that is, obligations enforceable by or on behalf of children in YOIs: (i) to have regard to the ‘welfare’ principle encapsulated in the UN Convention and the European Charter; and (ii) to take effective steps to protect children in YOIs from any ill-treatment, whether at the hands of Prison Service staff or of other inmates, of the type which engages either Arts 3 or 8 of the European Convention. ‘

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

Times 05-Dec-2002, Gazette 16-Jan-2003, Gazette 23-Jan-2003, [2002] EWHC 2497 (Admin), [2003] 1 FLR 484

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 17 47, Prison Act 1952, Young Offender Institution Rules 2000 (2000 SI 3371), European Convention on Human Rights 8

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Somerset County Council, ARC Southern Limited ex parte Richard Dixon Admn 18-Apr-1997
. .
Cited – In Re C (A Minor) (Medical Treatment: Court’s Jurisdiction); Re C (Detention: Medical Treatment) FD 21-Mar-1997
A children’s clinic is not secure accommodation, and the court may make orders for his or her treatment whilst in the clinic. The court discussed whether the state had power if necessary to detain a child using its parens patriae powers to give . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte World Development Movement Ltd QBD 1995
A British consortium looked for assistance in providing a hydro-electric project on the Pergau river. One interested government department advised that it was not economical and an abuse of the overseas aid programme, but the respondent decided to . .
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 – Spink, Regina (on the Application Of) v Wandsworth Borough Council Admn 20-Oct-2004
Parents requested the local authority to make provision for their severely disabled children. The local authority wished when deciding whether to provide adaptations of the house to make allowance for the parents’ financial resources.
Held: . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v SP CA 21-Dec-2004
The applcant, a girl aged 17 was in a young offender institution. She complained that she had been removed to segregation without first giving her chance to be heard. The respondent argued that there were sufficient post decision safeguards to . .
Cited – D, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 28-Apr-2005
D was undergoing trial for offences and was held in prison. He self-harmed repeatedly, and was recorded to require extra vigilance. He attempted to hang himself. Prison staff saved his life, but he was left paraplegic, and was then detained under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Prisons, Local Government, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178347

Baumbast and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department: ECJ 17 Sep 2002

The first applicant, his wife and her children had been granted leave to stay in the UK. At the time the leave was withdrawn the children were settled in schools, and were granted indefinite leave. The second applicant was the mother of children who also acquired leave. They each appealed refusal of leave to stay.
Held: The children had acquired the rights as the children of migrant workers within the EEC under the Regulation. That regulation was to be interpreted so as to provide also for the right of residence of the child’s primary carer.
‘A citizen of the European Union who no longer enjoys a right of residence as a migrant worker in the host Member State can, as a citizen of the Union, enjoy there a right of residence by direct application of Article 18(1) EC. The exercise of that right is subject to the limitations and conditions referred to in that provision, but the competent authorities and, where necessary, the national courts must ensure that those limitations and conditions are applied in compliance with the general principles of Community Law and, in particular, the principle of proportionality.’
‘A citizen of the European Union who no longer enjoys a right of residence as a migrant worker in the host Member State can, as a citizen of the Union, enjoy there a right of residence by direct application of Article 18(1) EC. The exercise of that right is subject to the limitations and conditions referred to in that provision, but the competent authorities and, where necessary, the national courts must ensure that those limitations and conditions are applied in compliance with the general principles of Community Law and, in particular, the principle of proportionality.’

Judges:

Rodriguez Iglesia, Jann, Macken, Colneric, von Bahr, Gulmann, Edward, La Pergola, Puissochet, Wathelet, Skouris

Citations:

Times 08-Oct-2002, [2002] EUECJ C-413/99, [2002] ECR 1-7091

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 12

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Ali v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 3-May-2006
The applicants sought asylum. Their child had a right of residence as a European citizen.
Held: The applicants could not rely upon their child’s right of residence to establish one for themselves. . .
Cited – Kaczmarek v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 27-Nov-2008
The claimant entered the UK as a student coming from Poland. She then worked as a kitchen maid, but having left that job on becoming a mother was refused income support. She later returned to work. She said that the rules which denied her benefit . .
Cited – MDB and Others (Article 12, 1612/68) Italy UTIAC 2-Jun-2010
TIAC (i) In London Borough of Harrow v Ibrahim Case C-310/08 and Maria Teixeira v London Borough of Lambeth Case C-480/08 the European Court of Justice ECJ confirmed the principle established in the Baumbast Case . .
Cited – Mirga v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Samin v Westminster City Council SC 27-Jan-2016
The claimants, a Polish national and an Austrian national, appealed against decisions of the Court of Appeal upholding decisions that they were not entitled to certain benefits, namely income support and housing assistance respectively, pursuant to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Children

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177329

In re S (Children) (Child abduction: Asylum appeal): CA 28 May 2002

The appellant was the mother of a child, who was claiming asylum. The father sought the return of the child to India, claiming he had been abducted by the mother. She said that whilst her claim for asylum was extant, the court must not allow her or the child to be removed.
Held: India was not a signatory to the convention, and therefore the matter had to be dealt with under the court’s wardship jurisdiction. The mother and children had now been granted exceptional leave to stay in the UK. The words ‘remove’ or ‘required to leave’ in the 1999 Act, were to be read as technical immigration law terms, with no wider implications. The proper forum for the father’s claim was India, and the child must be returned.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Laws and Lord Justice Rix

Citations:

Times 03-Jun-2002, Gazette 04-Jul-2002

Statutes:

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – In re S (Children) (Child abduction: Asylum appeal) FD 24-Apr-2002
The mother had applied here for asylum. Her application had been refused but was subject to appeal. The father in India sought the return of the children on the basis that they had been removed from a Convention country which was their habitual . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – In re S (Children) (Child abduction: Asylum appeal) FD 24-Apr-2002
The mother had applied here for asylum. Her application had been refused but was subject to appeal. The father in India sought the return of the children on the basis that they had been removed from a Convention country which was their habitual . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Children

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172179

Re C (A child): CA 2002

A family residential assessment was considered. A residential hospital assessment was recommended, but the authority proposed a less expensive local assessment. The parents sought an order under section 38(6) for the recommended assessment. The judge thought the recommended option preferable, but ordered the local assessment out of considerations of cost.
Held: The parents’ appeal was allowed. Cost was only one factor, though an important one. A local authority making a proposal based on cost must provide cogent evidence, and might include consideration of the alternatives, including shared funding. The family’s human rights had been engaged, and the judge had been wrong to go ahead on untested written evidence.

Citations:

[2002] 1 FLR 545

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.228158

Lillie and Reed v Newcastle City Council, Barker, Jones, Saradjian, Wardell: QBD 30 Jul 2002

The applicants sought judicial review of a report prepared for the respondent. They had been accused of child abuse whilst working as nursery assistants.
Held: The report was fundamentally flawed, and almost deliberately designed to manufacture allegations and lay blame at the feet of the claimants. It was disgraceful: ‘Consciously, after a detailed consideration of the material assembled before them, set out to misrepresent the state of the evidence available to support their joint belief that Mr Lillie and Miss Reed and other local residents were child abusers (and indeed abusers on a massive scale) and to give readers the impression that statements by parents and/or children had been corroborated by police inquiries.’
There was no substantial evidence of any abuse having taken place, and there was thorough going bad practice by the respondent and by those conducting the investigation. The damage to the claimants had been substantial and quite unjustified.
Eady J said: ‘I decided, therefore, that each Claimant was entitled to what is now generally recognised to be the maximum amount for compensatory damages in libel proceedings. I award each of them andpound;200,000. What matters primarily is that they are entitled to be vindicated and recognised as innocent citizens who should, in my judgment, be free to exist for what remains of their lives untouched by the stigma of child abuse.’

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Eady

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1600 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – King v Telegraph Group Ltd CA 18-May-2004
The defendant appealed against interim costs orders made in the claim against it for defamation.
Held: The general power of cost capping measures available to courts were available also in defamation proceedings. The claimant was being . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v Telegraph Group Ltd QBD 2-Dec-2004
The claimant MP alleged defamation in articles by the defendant newspaper. They claimed to have found papers in Iraqi government offices after the invasion of Iraq which implicated the claimant. The claimant said the allegations were grossly . .
Cited – Seray-Wurie v The Charity Commission of England and Wales QBD 23-Apr-2008
The defendant sought an order to strike out the claimant’s allegations of defamation and other torts. The defendants claimed qualified privilege in that the statements complained of were contained in a report prepared by it in fulfilment of its . .
Cited – Cairns v Modi CA 31-Oct-2012
Three appeals against the levels of damages awards were heard together, and the court considered the principles to be applied.
Held: In assessing compensation following a libel, the essential question was how much loss and damage did the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Defamation, Children

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174434

P, C And S v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jul 2002

The applicants challenged the way in which their newborn children had been removed by the state after birth. S had not had the opportunity of legal representation, after her lawyers had withdrawn. The removal of S’s child was challenged as disproportionate and a breach of the right to family life.
Held: Given the importance of the decision, the denial of legal representation infringed the family’s legal rights. Representation was necessary, and the refusal to allow an adjournment denied a fair trial. The procedure under which a decision was made before the birth of a child to remove it at birth, leading to a probable adoption was draconian and not justified given the alternative possibilities, and was an interference with the right to family life.

Judges:

Costa, Baka, Bratza, Jorundsson, Loucaides, Birsan and Ugrekhelidze, Early

Citations:

Times 16-Aug-2002, 56547/00, [2002] ECHR 599, (2002) 35 EHRR 1075, [2002] ECHR 604

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Family

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174384

In re S (Child) (Abduction: Custody rights): CA 3 Jul 2002

The mother accepted that she had abducted her child from Israel, but sought to establish a defence under the convention that the security conditions in Israel were such as to justify the removal.
Held: The Convention requirements were restrictive, and were not satisfied in this case. The test of whether there was a grave risk that the minor’s return would expose her to physical and psychological harm and otherwise place her in an intolerable situation, required a twofold test. First to look at the actual risks faced, and then to take a broader view. The section was correctly to be interpreted narrowly. The risk of terrorist attack was not so high that she would not have been able to take minimal steps to reduce that risk.
Ward LJ said: ‘Although it is possible to appeal against a finding of fact, it is notoriously difficult to succeed in so doing. Where findings of fact are made based on the demeanour of a witness, the appeal court will seldom interfere because the trial judge has the special advantage over the appellate judge.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Sedley and Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

Times 15-Jul-2002, Gazette 12-Sep-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 908, [2002] Fam Law 733, [2002] 3 FCR 43, [2002] 1 WLR 3355

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 13(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174323

Josu Miguel Dyaz Garcya v European Parliament: ECFI 18 Dec 1992

ECJ 1. Under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, the treatment, as a dependent child, of a person whom an official has a legal responsibility to maintain and whose maintenance involves heavy expenditure constitutes an exceptional step. The condition that the official must have a legal responsibility to maintain a person other than a dependent child must for that reason be interpreted strictly. The concept of ‘a legal responsibility to maintain’ used in the Staff Regulations is derived from the legal systems of the Member States, which, under their laws, impose a mutual responsibility to provide maintenance on relatives by blood and/or marriage of a greater or lesser degree of proximity. That concept must therefore be understood as referring exclusively to an obligation maintenance imposed on an official by a source of law independent of the will of the parties and as excluding maintenance obligations of a contractual, moral or compensatory nature. Since neither Community law nor the Staff Regulations provide the Community court with any guide as to how it should define, by way of independent interpretation, the meaning and scope of a legal responsibility to maintain, entitling an official to receive a dependent child allowance under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, it is necessary to determine whether the national legal system to which the official in question is subject imposes such a legal responsibility on the official. 2. The terms of a provision of Community law which makes no express reference to the laws of the Member States for the purpose of determining its meaning and scope must normally be given an independent interpretation, which must take into account the context of the provision and the purpose of the relevant regulations. In the absence of an express reference to the laws of the Member States, the application of Community law may sometimes necessitate a reference to the laws of the Member States where the Community court cannot identify in Community law or in the general principles of Community law criteria enabling it to define the meaning and scope of such a provision by way of independent interpretation. 3. An official has no legitimate interest in the annulment of a decision for breach of procedural requirements where the administration has no scope for the exercise of discretion but is bound to act as it has done. In such a case, the annulment of the contested decision could lead only to the adoption of another decision identical in substance to the decision annulled.

Citations:

T-43/90, [1992] EUECJ T-43/90

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Children, Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172447

Regina (W) v Lambeth London Borough Council: CA 3 May 2002

A family had been found to be voluntarily homeless. The family asked the authority to provide housing to the family under the 1989 Act from its duty to care for the children.
Held: The 1989 Act did not change the law in the 1980 Act. The authority had a power to assist and Another child in these circumstances. However, it was not a duty, and the authority had a discretion as to how it might use the power. The 2001 Lambeth case was wrongly decided. The powers of the authority were not to be compartmentalized.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Laws and Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

Times 23-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 613

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 17, Child Care Act 1980 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (A) v Lambeth London Borough Council CA 5-Nov-2001
The provisions requiring local authorities to look to the welfare of children within their area was a general one, and was not enforceable to secure the interests of individual children. It was not the case that a ‘target’ duty crystallised into an . .

Cited by:

Cited – Desnousse v London Borough of Newham and others CA 17-May-2006
The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government, Housing

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171259

In re H and A (Children) (Paternity: Blood Tests): CA 21 Mar 2002

The right to know one’s parentage and identity is a fundamental part of private life. Thorpe LJ said: ‘first, that the interests of justice are best served by the ascertainment of the truth and secondly, that the court should be furnished with the best available science and not confined to such unsatisfactory alternatives as presumptions and inferences. It seems to me obvious that all that Lord Hodson expressed in the passage [above] . . applies with even greater force and logic in a later era. First, there have been huge scientific advances with the arrival of DNA testing. Scientists no longer require blood, thus removing what for some is the unbearable process of its extraction. Of even greater importance is the abandonment of the legal concept of legitimacy achieved by the Family Law Reform Act 1987.’

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Butler-Sloss DBE LJ P, Key LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 383, [2002] 1 FLR 1145, [2002] 2 FCR 469

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Law Reform Act 1987

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – London Borough of Lewisham v D and Others FD 29-Mar-2010
The local authority was investigating allegations involving the family history of children in their care. They sought disclosure by the respondent police authority of the results DNA comparison tests to assist their investigations. The court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170084

R (Children) v R (Children): CA 7 Dec 2001

The parents sought defined contact arrangements after a divorce, with differing proposals. It was said that the father had been unable to move on following the relationship breakdown, and the mother sought a condition on contact that the father receive psychiatric assessment. The father came to reject the judge’s independence. The court made contact orders but also orders restraining publication of the matters before the court, and against the husband. He now appealed, asking the order to be set aside because he had not been given a fair hearing.
Held: The burden on a party in establishing bias is substantial. In his relationship with a litigant in person, the judge must be a shepherd and not a wolf. Parts of the order were immoderate and not supported by any evidence of need. The appeal was allowed in part, removing certain parts of the order, and extending the contact.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Keene And Sir Swinton Thomas

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1880

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167844

A Health Authority v Dr X and Others: CA 21 Dec 2001

Where, after a children case has been heard, a party wishes to apply for the release of papers, the application should be made before the judge who had heard the case. To do otherwise left the second judge making a difficult assessment with insufficient direct knowledge of the issues and people involved.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Harrison

Citations:

[2002] 1 FLR 1045, Times 01-Feb-2002, [2001] Lloyds (Medical) 349, [2001] EWCA Civ 2014, [2002] Fam Law 342, [2002] 2 All ER 780, [2002] 2 FCR 357

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – A Health Authority v X (Discovery: Medical Conduct) FD 2001
There is a compelling public interest in authorising the disclosure of documents to the General Medical Council if they ‘are or may be relevant to the General Medical Council carrying out its statutory duties to protect the public against possible . .

Cited by:

Cited – H (A Healthcare Worker) v Associated Newspapers Limited CA 27-Feb-2002
The applicant had been a health care worker, but was no longer working. He had come to be HIV positive, and an order was sought protecting his identity from disclosure in the press. He had evidence that the NHS guidelines on notification of patients . .
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 – Re C (A Child) FC 29-Sep-2015
There had been care proceedings as to C. The mother was treated by a psychiatrist, X, and an associate Y. They also prepared expert reports. M formally complained about X, and the charges having been dismissed, the doctors now sought disclosure of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Children, Health Professions

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167523

G v G (Parental Order; Revocation): FD 11 May 2012

The commissioning father of a child born through a surrogacy agreement made an application for the revocation of a parental order on the grounds that, first, the order had been wrongly made by reason of numerous procedural defects and, secondly, it had been obtained by a concealment by the commissioning mother of a fact – that she was intending to leave him and raise the child as a lone parent – which, if known, would, according to the commissioning father, have resulted in no order being made.
Held: The application was refused. A parental order, like an adoption order, confers a lifelong status and inalienable parental responsibility to the permanent exclusion of those who until then had parental status, and that, there being no statutory power to set aside a parental order, the court considering such an application should therefore be guided by the authorities on revoking adoption orders.

Judges:

Hedley J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1979 (Fam), [2013] 1 FLR 286

Links:

Bailii

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: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.463337

In Re Besant: CA 9 Apr 1879

The appellant challenged an order removing her children after she had been prosecuted for publishing an obscene libel, in the form of a book on abortion.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The court removed the daughter of Annie Besant and the Rev Frank Besant from the custody of the former, notwithstanding that the parties had agreed that she should have custody.
James LJ: ‘We have it before us that the Appellant was found guilty by a jury of publishing a work stigmatized by them as being calculated to deprave public morals, and that she, in spite of that finding, determined to persist, and did persist, in publishing that work. That the jury were right in their finding the Judges of the Court of Queen’s Bench had no doubt, and we are constrained to say that we entirely concur. The other works charged are substantially of the same character. It is impossible for us not to feel that the conduct of the Appellant in writing and publishing such works is so repugnant, so abhorrent to the feelings of the great majority of decent Englishmen and Englishwomen, and would be regarded by them with such disgust, not as matters of opinion, but as violations of morality, decency, and womanly propriety, that the future of a girl brought up in association with such a propaganda would be incalculably prejudiced. The Appellant contends that these are unfounded and unwarranted antipathies and prejudices, like those with which rival sects were wont to regard one another. But the Court cannot allow its ward to run the risk of being brought up, or growing up, in opposition to the views of mankind generally as to what is moral, what is decent, what is womanly or proper, merely because her mother differs from those views and hopes that by the efforts of herself and her fellow-propagandists the world will be some day converted. If the ward were allowed to remain with the mother, it is possible, and, perhaps, not improbable, that she would grow up to be the writer and publisher of such works as those before us. From such a possible future the Master of the Rolls thought it his duty to protect her, and we have no hesitation in saying that we entirely concur with him.’
An agreement by a father to part with custody was void, being contrary to public policy.

Judges:

James Baggallay and Bramwell LJJ

Citations:

(1879) 11 Ch D 508

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – In Re Besant ChD 18-May-1878
Mrs Besant had been prosecuted for publishing an obscene libel in the form of a book on abortion.
Held: The publication of the book was in itself sufficient grounds for removing Mrs Besant’s seven year old daughter from her mother’s custody. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – In Re Besant ChD 18-May-1878
Mrs Besant had been prosecuted for publishing an obscene libel in the form of a book on abortion.
Held: The publication of the book was in itself sufficient grounds for removing Mrs Besant’s seven year old daughter from her mother’s custody. . .
Cited – Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others Admn 18-Apr-2002
The claimant challenged the Order as regards the prescription of the morning-after pill, asserting that the pill would cause miscarriages, and that therefore the use would be an offence under the 1861 Act.
Held: ‘SPUC’s case is that any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.223710

Regina (L and Others) v Manchester City Council, Regina (R and Another) v Same: QBD 28 Sep 2001

The council had a policy under which the financial assistance it gave to short term foster carers who were relatives of the children involved was rather less than would be given to non-family carers. The policy was challenged as unreasonable.
Held: The policy which imposed arbitrary financial limits was unreasonable, and would inevitably conflict with the duty to look to the child’s welfare. The policy operated to discriminate against family members and therefore infringed their human rights under the convention

Judges:

Mr Justice Munby

Citations:

Times 10-Dec-2001, [2002] Fam Law 13, [2001] EWHC 707 (Admin), [2002] 1 FLR 43, [2002] ACD 45, (2002) 5 CCL Rep 268

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 22(3)(a), European Convention on Human Rights 8 14

Family, Children, Local Government, Human Rights, Local Government

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.166977

TP And KM v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 May 2001

The Grand Chamber found a violation of Articles 8 and 13 and awarded each applicant GBP 10,000 in respect of a separation which lasted a year. Article 8 imposes positive obligations of disclosure on a local authority involved in care proceedings: ‘The positive obligation on the Contracting State to protect the interests of the family requires that this material be made available to the parent concerned, even in the absence of any request by the parent. If there were doubts as to whether this posed a risk to the welfare of the child, the matter should have been submitted to the court by the local authority at the earliest stage in the proceedings possible for it to resolve the issues involved.’

Citations:

28945/95, (2001) 34 EHRR 42, [2001] ECHR 332, [2001] 2 FLR 549, (2001) 3 LGLR 52, [2001] 2 FCR 289, (2001) 4 CCL Rep 398, [2001] Fam Law 590

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8 13

Cited by:

Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Cited – MAK and RK v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Mar-2010
mak_ukECHR10
When RK, a nine year old girl was taken to hospital, with bruises, the paediatrician wrongly suspecting sexual abuse, took blood samples and intimate photographs in the absence of the parents and without their consent.
Held: The doctor had . .
Cited – Durham County Council v Dunn CA 13-Dec-2012
The claimant wished to begin a claim alleging historic sexual abuse while he had been at an institution run by the defendants. The claimant sought pre-trial disclosure of various documents and the court now considered the principle applicable, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Damages, Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166102

L v Finland: ECHR 27 Apr 2000

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 13; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings
‘the consideration of what is in the best interests of the child is of crucial importance.’

Judges:

Mr G. Ress

Citations:

[2000] ECHR 175, 25651/94, [2000] ECHR 176, [2000] 2 FLR 118, [2000] Fam Law 536, (2001) 31 EHRR 30, [2000] 3 FCR 219, 31 EHRR 30

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

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

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165861

K And T v Finland: ECHR 27 Apr 2000

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings
Taking a newly born child straight into care may infringe the right to family life.

Citations:

ECHR 2001-VII, [2000] ECHR 173, 25702/94, [2000] ECHR 174

Links:

Worldii, Bailii

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 . .
See Also – K And T v Finland ECHR 12-Jul-2001
ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 with regard to emergency care order concerning J.; No violation of Art. 8 with regard to emergency care order concerning M.; No violation of Art. 8 . .
Cited – Gillberg v Sweden ECHR 3-Apr-2012
(Grand Chamber) The applicant, a consultant psychiatrist, had conducted research with children under undertakings of absolute privacy. Several years later a researcher, for proper reasons, obtained court orders for the disclosure of the data under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165860

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 adoption of measures designed to secure respect for family life even in the sphere of relations between individuals, including both the provision of a regulatory framework of adjudicatory and enforcement machinery protecting individuals’ rights and the implementation, where appropriate, of specific steps. In both the negative and positive contexts, regard must be had to the fair balance which has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and the community, including other concerned third parties, and the state’s margin of appreciation.’ Speed was essential in determining disputes about children.

Citations:

32346/96, (2001) 33 EHRR I, [2001] 1 FLR 153, [2000] ECHR 419, [2000] 3 FCR 193, 2001 Fam LR 103, [2000] Fam Law 880

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark CA 16-Oct-2003
The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the . .
Mentioned – 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 . .
Cited – Van Colle v Hertfordshire Police QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimants claimed for the estate of their murdered son. He had been waiting to give evidence in a criminal trial, and had asked the police for support having received threats. Other witnesses had also suffered intimidation including acts of . .
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.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165932

Mazurek v France: ECHR 1 Feb 2000

ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 14+P1-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+8; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

34406/97, [2000] ECHR 48, (2006) 42 EHRR 9

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Hand and Another v George ChD 17-Mar-2017
Adopted grandchildren entitled to succession
The court was asked whether the adopted children whose adopting father, the son of the testator, were grandchildren of the testator for the purposes of his will.
Held: The claim succeeded. The defendants, the other beneficiaries were not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Wills and Probate

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165807

Bronda v Italy: ECHR 9 Jun 1998

In some fields of law legal rules may not be laid down with total precision. Undue delay in child contact proceedings may have irreversible effects upon the child.

Citations:

[1998] ECHR 46, 22430/93, (1998) 33 EHRR 81

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Gillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another HL 8-Mar-2006
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about . .
Cited – NJDB v JEG and Another SC 23-May-2012
Mother and father disputed whether the father should be allowed contact with their child S. Court orders had been made for residential and non-residential contact, but there were difficulties and the order for contact was reversed on the basis that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165623

Johansen v Norway: ECHR 7 Aug 1996

The court had to consider a permanent placement of a child with a view to adoption in oposition to the natural parents’ wishes.
Held: Particular weight should be attached to the best interests of the child, which may override those of the parent: ‘These measures were particularly far-reaching in that they totally deprived the applicant of her family life with the child and were inconsistent with the aim of reuniting them. Such measures should only be applied in exceptional circumstances and could only be justified if they were motivated by an overriding requirement pertaining to the child’s best interests.’

Citations:

17383/90, (1997) 23 EHRR 33, [1996] ECHR 31

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – AHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others HL 24-Feb-2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. . .
Cited – EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 22-Oct-2008
The claimant challenged the respondent’s decision to order the return of herself and her son to Lebanon.
Held: The test for whether a claimant’s rights would be infringed to such an extent as to prevent their return home was a strict one, but . .
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 – R And H v The United Kingdom ECHR 31-May-2011
The court considered arrangements for an adoption in Northern Ireland where the parent’s consent was withheld.
Held: For parental consent to be overriden there had to be shown an overriding need for the decision. . .
Cited – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Cited – YC v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Mar-2012
The court spelt out the stark effects of the proportionality requirement in its application to a determination that a child should be adopted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Adoption

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165440

White v White: SCS 6 Mar 2001

Judges:

Lord President Rodger

Citations:

[2001] ScotCS 48, 2001 SC 689, 2001 Fam LR 21, 2001 SCLR 607, 2001 SLT 485

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Cited by:

Cited – NJDB v JEG and Another SC 23-May-2012
Mother and father disputed whether the father should be allowed contact with their child S. Court orders had been made for residential and non-residential contact, but there were difficulties and the order for contact was reversed on the basis that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Children

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.164122

Walley v Walley: CA 22 Jun 2005

An application had been brought for an order to have a child returned to South Africa. The court had given the order subject to the father’s compliance with conditions set out in the order. The father had not complied. The mother sought an order discharging the first. Counsel and the judge had decided this could only be dealt with by an appeal.
Held: This appeal was wrongly conceived. The judge had had power either under the express liberty to apply or under her inherent jurisdiction to review the first order as to its implementation. She should have used those powers.

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Wall LJ, Neuberger LJ

Citations:

Times 13-Jul-2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished. – In Re M (Minors) (Child Abduction: Undertakings) CA 15-Aug-1994
A Hague Convention order was not appealable, nor do undertakings fetter the court’s discretion. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.228587

In re M (a Minor) (Care order: Freeing Application): CA 18 Dec 2003

Where a local authority sought both a care order and an order freeing the child for adoption, the court must be careful to distinguish between the applications. The care application should be dealt with first.

Judges:

Ward, Carnwath LJJ

Citations:

Times 02-Jan-2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – In re D (Simultaneous applications for care order and freeing order) 1999
The judge considering two applications for a care order and an adoption order had confused the proper order of issues to be considered, and that error contaminated his decision. The two should be dealt with in sequence. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Children

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.190150

Re B (A Child): CA 18 Oct 2017

The court heard a case in which in the course of a child residence dispute F had made and sought to have use before the court, covert recordings of interviews and telephone conversations with practitioners.
Held: The actual matters had been decided adequately without the recordings, but the court acknowledged both the difficulties arising and the absence of authority, and said that an initation would be made to the Family Justice Council to consider the issue.

Judges:

Sir James Munby P FD, King LJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1579

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Evidence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.597402

J v C: CA 1 Jun 2006

Wall LJ said that section 8 was not to be used by courts to take authority over when a child was to be informed as to the identity of his father.

Judges:

Wall LJ

Citations:

Times 01-Jun-2006, [2007] Fam 1

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re F (Children) (Declaration of Paternity) CA 25-Jul-2007
The mother appealed a decision that the court had power to decide whether the child should be told of its paternity.
Held: J -v- C had been dealing with particular procedural issues. The Family justice system in its protective function was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.259155

Re A: CA 4 Feb 2003

The court considered whether publicity should be allowed in a children’s application: ‘On the one hand, there is the need to protect the welfare of children. This can arise in a variety of ways. Children can be directly affected by the publication of material about them. If this comes to the notice of their school friends or others, then they may be the subject of jokes, teasing, bullying, and worse. Children, particularly of primary school age, are greatly susceptible to embarrassments of this sort. The other way in which it can be harmful to children is if it serves to undermine the confidence and the ability to cope of the person who is looking after the child.’

Judges:

Hale LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 210

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.198582

Ridgwell and others v Ridgwell and others; In Re RGST Settlement Trusts: ChD 14 Nov 2007

Funds were held upon trust for X with the remainder (in default of exercise of the power of appointment) to his three children aged 7,5 and 2. It was beneficial for tax purposes to insert a life interest in favour of X’s surviving spouse (thereby postponing the interest of the children). An alternative would have been to make outright transfers to the children during the lifetime of X. HHJ Behrens accepted that it was not appropriate to put substantial sums on bare trust for the children given their ages and the fact that they would then have complete control of the assets at the age of 18. That was regarded as a moral hazard, and in preference to that vesting was deferred.

Judges:

Behrens QC J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2666 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Variation of Trusts Act 1958 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Wright and Another v Gater and Others ChD 7-Nov-2011
The beneficiary, a child was to inherit estates of his grandparents and parents, all of which were intestate. An application was made to vary the provisions in order to reduce the liability to Inheritance Tax.
Held: A deferment of vesting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Children

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.261464

In Re H (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody): HL 3 Feb 2000

It was possible for the court itself to have sufficient rights of custody under the Convention to allow a party to apply on the basis that an abduction had interfered with those rights of custody. A father had begun proceedings but did not himself have rights awarded, but he could apply on the basis that the court had acquired those rights.

Citations:

Times 08-Feb-2000, Gazette 17-Feb-2000, [2000] UKHL 6, [2000] 2 WLR 337, [2000] 2 AC 291, [2000] 1 FCR 225, [2000] 2 All ER 1

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980, Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 Sch 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – In Re H (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody) CA 16-Nov-1999
Once a court has become involved in the issues surrounding the ‘right of custody’ of a child as set down in the convention, an English court would not attempt to substitute its own jurisdiction. The child was of unmarried parents in Ireland. The . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – In Re H (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody) CA 16-Nov-1999
Once a court has become involved in the issues surrounding the ‘right of custody’ of a child as set down in the convention, an English court would not attempt to substitute its own jurisdiction. The child was of unmarried parents in Ireland. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159040

Lancashire County Council and Another v B and Others; Lancashire County Council v A: HL 16 Mar 2000

A seven month old child had been injured, but it was not possible to establish whether this had taken place whilst with her parents or with a child minder. The Council brought care proceedings also for the minder’s own child B.
Held: Even though the parents could not be held responsible, the threshold conditions which would allow proceedings for a care order to be begun were established. To require proof of who had committed the abuse would make it frequently impossible for the authorities to act to protect children. The phrase ‘care given to the child’ did not require restriction to the care given by the parents or by a particular person. ‘Different considerations from the norm apply in a case of shared caring where the care given by one or other of the carers is proved to have been deficient, with the child suffering harm in consequence, but the court is unable to identify which of the carers provided the deficient care. In such a case, the phrase ‘care given to the child’ is apt to embrace not merely the care given by the parents or other primary carers; it is apt to embrace the care given by any of the carers.’

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Nolan Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Hoffmann Lord Clyde

Citations:

Times 17-Mar-2000, Gazette 30-Mar-2000, [2000] UKHL 16, [2000] 2 AC 147, [2000] 1 FLR 583, [2000] 2 All ER 97

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Re M (A Minor) (Care Orders: Threshold Conditions) HL 7-Jun-1994
The father had been sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of the child’s mother. Application was made for the child to be made subject to a care order. The father appealed refusal of an order.
Held: When an application was made on the . .
Cited – In re G (A Minor)(Care Order: Threshold Conditions) FD 1995
The court considered the standard of evidence required to satisfy the threshold condition under the Act: ‘The inescapable construction of section 31, in my judgment, is that the court has to be satisfied by evidence that the significant harm . .
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 . .
Appeal from – Re B and W (Minors), Lancashire County Council and Another v B and Others CA 27-Jul-1999
The threshold conditions for the making of a care order, relate to the absence of proper care of a child, and the suffering of significant harm whilst in care arrangements then prevailing. There was no requirement on the court that it be able to . .

Cited by:

Cited – A Local Authority v A and D FD 5-Dec-2001
A five week old baby had been brought into hospital with cranial pressure. At first signs of injury were not seen. It was concluded that the child may have been shaken, and the child protection procedures began. No criminal proceedings were to take . .
Doubted – In re O and N (Minors); In re B (Minors) (Care: Preliminary hearing) HL 3-Apr-2003
The appeals were from conflicting decisions in care applications where one or other or both parents were guilty of lack of care, but there was no evidence to say which was responsible.
Held: The threshold criteria had been met, and the court . .
Cited – North Yorkshire County Council v SA and others CA 1-Jul-2003
The child was taken to hospital with injuries which the doctors concluded were non-accidental. The identity of the abuser was in doubt.
Held: The court set out to identify the procedures in cases involving suspected non-accidental injuries . .
Cited – Lancashire County Council v R (A Minor) and others FD 4-Dec-2008
The local authority sought a care order, alleging serious physical abuse of the child. The mother said that any injuries had been inflicted by the father. The father said that the cause was the mother.
Held: The injuries were not likely to . .
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 – 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 J (Children) CA 3-Apr-2012
The mother JJ’s first baby had died after physical abuse inflicted either by her or the father. In care proceedings for a later child, the judge concluded ‘T-L’s injuries could have been inflicted by either, or both, of them. Singling out a likely . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159050

Regina v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Venables, Regina v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Thompson: HL 12 Jun 1997

A sentence of detention during her majesty’s pleasure when imposed on a youth was not the same as a sentence of life imprisonment, and the Home Secretary was wrong to treat it on the same basis and to make allowance for expressions of public opinion. Of a sentence under the section: ‘The Secretary of State is not dealing with a sentence of the same kind as the mandatory life sentence imposed on an adult murderer, the duration of which is determined by the sentence of the court and is for life. In cases of detention during Her Majesty’s pleasure the duty of the Secretary of State is to decide how long that detention is to last, not to determine whether or not to release prematurely a person on whom the sentence of the court is life imprisonment.’ The fixing of the tariff amounted to a sentencing exercise, to which Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights applies, and that the requirements of Article 6(1) were not met because the Home Secretary, who set the initial tariff, was not independent of the executive.

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead

Citations:

Gazette 10-Sep-1997, [1997] Fam Law 786, [1998] AC 407, [1997] UKHL 25, [1997] 3 All ER 97, [1997] 3 WLR 23, [1997] 2 FLR 471

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 1(5) 4, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 53(1), European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Venables Regina v Same, Thompson CACD 7-Aug-1996
A sentence of a young person to ‘Detention during Her Majesty’s pleasure’ is not to be thought of as the same as a life sentence; The Home secretary had been unfair in setting the tarriff sentence for two youths convicted of murder on a basis which . .
At First instance – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Venables; Regina v Similar QBD 7-May-1996
The Home Secretary was wrong to apply adult criteria on setting a release date for a child detained during Her Majesty’s Pleasure for an offence of murder. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina on the Application of Smith v The Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 3-Apr-2003
The case asked what duty the respondent had, in respect of youths sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty’s Pleasure before 30th November 2000, to review their continued detention at regular intervals. A statement said that once a tarriff had . .
Cited – Regina (on the Application of Dudson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice Admn 21-Nov-2003
The applicant had been sentenced to detention during Her Majesty’s Pleasure. He sought a judicial review of the Lord Chief Justice’s recommendation to the Home Secretary for the minimum term he was to serve.
Held: In exercising this function, . .
Cited – Regina (Smith) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; and similar CA 11-Feb-2004
The applicants were young persons who had been detained during Her Majesty’s Pleasure after convictions for murder. The respondent appealed a finding that he was under a duty to review the tariff with a view to release even before the expiry of the . .
Cited – Browne v The Queen PC 6-May-1999
(St Christopher and Nevis) The appellant had been convicted of murder whilst still a youth. He had accordingly been sentenced to be detained ‘during [the Governor-General’s] pleasure; and if so sentenced he shall be liable to be detained in such . .
Cited – Smith, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 28-Jul-2005
The applicant had, as a child been subject to detention during Her Majesty’s pleasure, the sentence being imposed before 30 November 2000. She argued that that sentence should be subject to periodic review despite the term had been fixed by the Lord . .
See Also – T and V v The United Kingdom ECHR 8-Apr-1999
Public trial in an adult court of juvenile charged with murder and imposition of a sentence of detention during Her Majesty’s pleasure with a tariff of fifteen years fixed by a member of the executive. The trial of two ten year olds in a public . .
See Also – V v The United Kingdom; T v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Dec-1999
The claimant challenged to the power of the Secretary of State to set a tariff where the sentence was imposed pursuant to section 53(1). The setting of the tariff was found to be a sentencing exercise which failed to comply with Article 6(1) of the . .
Cited – Dudson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 28-Jul-2005
The defendant had committed a murder when aged 16, and after conviction sentenced to be detailed during Her Majesty’s Pleasure. His tarriff had been set at 18 years, reduced to 16 years after review.
Held: ‘What is at issue is the general . .
Cited – O’Dowd (Boy George) v National Probation Service London Admn 23-Dec-2009
Refusal of curfew relaxation was reasonable
The claimant had been released from prison early on licence subject to conditions including a home detention curfew. He was offered a place on a TV programme, Celebrity Big Brother, which would require relaxation or alteration of his place of . .
Cited – Shoesmith, Regina (on The Application of) v OFSTED and Others CA 27-May-2011
The claimant appealed against dismissal of her claim. She had been head of Child Services at Haringey. After the notorious violent death of Baby P, the Secretary of State called for an inquiry under the Act. He then removed her as director. She . .
Cited – Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 16-Jul-2014
The appellant a British Citizen awaited execution in Singapore after conviction on a drugs charge. The only way she might get legal help for a further appeal would be if she was given legal aid by the respondent. She sought assistance both on Human . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Children, Human Rights

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.158900

In Re H and others (Minors): HL 10 Apr 1997

Three young children had been brought to England from Israel by their mother but without the consent of the father, who now sought their return. The mother claimed that the father had subsequently acquiesced in the removal. Both parents were orthodox Jews. The father said this had compelled him first to seek assistance from the Beth Din.
Held: When a Treaty ‘obligation is incorporated into domestic law, that obligation will be construed by reference to the principles of international law governing the interpretation and application of treaties, rather than by any domestic principle of construction.’

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Mustill, Lord Clyde

Citations:

[1997] 2 FCR 257, [1997] UKHL 12, [1998] AC 72, [1997] 2 All ER 225, [1997] 1 FLR 872, [1997] Fam Law 468

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re S (Minors) (Abduction: Acquiescence) 1994
For the purposes of Article 13 of the Convention, the question whether the wronged parent has ‘acquiesced’ in the removal or retention of the child depends upon his actual state of mind of the parent: ‘the court is primarily concerned, not with the . .
Cited – In re A Z (A Minor) (Abduction: Acquiescence) 1993
. .
Cited – Re A (Minors) (Abduction: Custody Rights) No 2 CA 29-Jul-1992
The mother had wrongfully removed the children from Australia to this country. The father wrote to the mother saying that ‘I think you know that what you have done is illegal, but I’m not going to fight it’ and generally giving the impression that . .
Cited – In Re H (Minors) (Abduction: Custody Rights) HL 1991
The House addressed the question whether wrongful removal and wrongful retention were mutually exclusive concepts. The issue arose in the context of the commencement date for the 1985 Act as between the two States involved.
Held: For the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Al-Jedda, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence Admn 12-Aug-2005
The claimant was born an Iraqi, but had been granted British Nationality. He was later detained in Iraq suspected of membership of a terrorist group. No charges were brought, and he complained that his article 5 rights were infringed. The defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.158887

W and B (Children) and W (Children): CA 23 May 2001

If the state is to interfere in the child’s right to respect for his family life, it has a duty to use its best endeavours to make good what it has taken away.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 757, [2001] 1 FLR 582

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A and Another v Essex County Council CA 17-Dec-2003
The claimant sought damages. The respondent had acted as an adoption agency but had failed to disclose all relevant information about the child.
Held: Any such duty extended only during the period where the child was with the prospective . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147562

G (Children): CA 22 Jun 2001

The court was asked, in proceedings for care and supervision orders under the Act, what have the local authority to be in a position to prove at the time when they make the application? To what extent can they rely upon evidence, which emerges, or events, which take place between the date of the application and the final hearing?

Judges:

Aldous, Hale, Jonathan Parker LJJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 968, [2001] 1 WLR 2100, [2001] 2 FCR 757, [2001] 2 FLR 1111, [2001] Fam Law 727

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147589

Al Habtoor v Fotheringham: CA 15 Feb 2001

There is no jurisdiction in wardship over a child not habitually resident in England. A child born in England of and English mother and Dubai father had gone to live with his mother in Dubai at the invitation of the father, but had there retained the boy against the mother’s will. The mother obtained certain orders in Dubai, but then returned to England. The court should give greater recognition to the judgments of foreign courts and refrain from grandiose assertions of jurisdictions. It was important to build bridges between Judeo Christian and Sharia legal traditions.
Thorpe LJ advised that the court should be ‘extremely circumspect’ and ‘must refrain from exhorbitant jurisdictional claims founded on nationality’ over a child who was neither habitually resident nor present here, because such claims were outdated, eccentric and liable to put at risk the development of understanding and co-operation between nations.

Judges:

Thorpe, Laws LJJ, Penry-Davey J

Citations:

Times 02-Mar-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 186, [2001] 1 FCR 385, [2001] 1 FLR 951

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Law Act 1986 2, Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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, International

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147435

TB v JB (Formerly J H) (Abduction: Grave Risk of Harm): CA 19 Dec 2000

The father appealed against rejection of his claim for the return of his three children to New Zealand.

Judges:

Laws, Hale, Arden LJJ

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 337, [2001] 2 FLR 515, [2001] 2 FCR 497, [2001] Fam Law 576

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re E (Children) (Abduction: Custody Appeal) SC 10-Jun-2011
Two children were born in Norway to a British mother (M) and Norwegian father (F). Having lived in Norway, M brought them to England to stay, but without F’s knowledge or consent. M replied to his application for their return that the children would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147370