Category: Children

Kent CC v C and Others: FC 25 May 2016

Citations:

[2016] EWFC 72

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Kent CC v C and Others FC 28-Jul-2016
Consideration of the procedure involved in returning two children to Slovakia, following a determination by this court on 25 May 2016 that they do not have habitual residence here. As a consequence, this court does not have jurisdiction to determine . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.592323

Kent CC v C and Others: FC 28 Jul 2016

Consideration of the procedure involved in returning two children to Slovakia, following a determination by this court on 25 May 2016 that they do not have habitual residence here. As a consequence, this court does not have jurisdiction to determine the care proceedings that had been issued by the Local Authority (LA).

Judges:

Theis DBE J

Citations:

[2016] EWFC 73

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Kent CC v C and Others FC 25-May-2016
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.592324

Re D (Appeal : Failure of Case Management): FD 24 Jul 2017

Appeal from a case management decision: ‘The case raises issues about judicial case management and, in particular, the court’s approach to the cross-examination of an alleged victim by an alleged abuser.’

Judges:

Peter Jackson J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1907 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Litigation Practice

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.591442

Re N-S (Children): CA 25 Jul 2017

The court was asked what is the extent of a judge’s responsibility to provide reasons in support of orders made at the conclusion of public law children proceedings? Secondly, where there has been a failure to give reasons, but there can be no challenge on appeal to the substantive orders made, what steps, if any, should the appellate court take to redress the lack of adequate reasoning?

Judges:

Sir James Munby P FD, McFarlane, Lewison LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1121

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.591189

Re M (Children): CA 29 Jun 2017

F had the benefit of an Order made in Estonia that he should be allowed contact with his two daughters now living in the UK. The court had found the order to be enforceable here, but could not arrange as required that contact be supervised.

Judges:

Black, Treacy, Simon LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 891

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.588337

PO and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Council of The London Borough of Newham: Admn 28 Jul 2014

Claim for judicial review brought by three children, who are Nigerian nationals, about the level of financial assistance that the Defendant, the Council of the London Borough of Newham, provided under section 17 of the Children Act 1989 to meet the subsistence needs which they and their mother had (as they were destitute) while the Secretary of State for the Home Department was considering whether or not they and their mother should be granted leave to remain in this country.

Judges:

John Howell QC

Citations:

[2014] WLR(D) 409, [2014] EWHC 2561 (Admin), [2015] PTSR D1

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Samuels v Birmingham City Council SC 12-Jun-2019
The appellant had been provided with emergency accommodation after losing her assured shorthold tenancy, but the court was now asked ‘whether the council adopted the correct approach in determining that the accommodation was ‘affordable’ for those . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Benefits, Immigration

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.536176

Regina (D) v Camberwell Green Youth Court; Regina (N) v Same etc: Admn 4 Feb 2002

Defendants appealed orders allowing children to give evidence by video link, and children appealed orders requiring them to attend court to give evidence.
Held: The right to a fair trial had to be interpreted broadly. Special measures taken to protect children did not infringe the Article 6 rights of defendants. The rules allowed safeguards to protect the fairness of the trial. The magistrates needed to approach the article differently.

Citations:

Times 13-Feb-2003, [2003] EWHC 227 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6, Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – D (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Camberwell Green Youth Court HL 27-Jan-2005
The defendant challenged the obligatory requirement that evidence given by a person under 17 in sex or violent offence cases must normally be given by video link.
Held: The purpose of the section was to improve the quality of the evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Human Rights, Children, Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Evidence

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.184963

Markham and Another v Regina: CACD 9 Jun 2017

Judicial review of decision to publicise the name of a young person accused of a crime.

Judges:

Sir Brian Leveson Q QBD, Blake, Lewis JJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Crim 739

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Youth and Criminal Justice Act 1999 45, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Children, Media

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588233

F v L: FD 9 Jun 2017

Appeal from a decision refusing an application by F (the appellant and the child’s mother) to relocate to Italy with D (the subject child) her son aged five and a child arrangements order.

Judges:

Russell J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1377 (Fam), [2017] WLR(D) 389

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588161

Great Ormond Street Hospital v Yates and Others: FD 11 Apr 2017

Baby Gard suffered an overwhelming and life threating condition. The Hospital considered that his welfare wa sbest served by withdrawal of life support. His parents could not agree. The Hospital now sought a declaration from the court as to the baby’s best interests.
Held: A declaration was made that the Hospital may lawfully withdraw all treatment, save for palliative care, to permit Charlie to die with dignity: ‘Charlie suffers from the RRM2B mutation of MDDS. No one in the world has ever treated this form of MDDS with nucleoside therapy, although patients with a different strain, TK2, have received nucleoside therapy with some recorded benefit. In mouse models, the benefit to TK2 patients was put at about 4% of life expectancy. There is no evidence that nucleoside therapy can cross the blood/brain barrier which it must do to treat RRM2B, although the US doctor expressed the hope that it might cross that barrier.
There is unanimity among the experts from whom I have heard that nucleoside therapy cannot reverse structural brain damage. I dare say that medical science may benefit objectively from the experiment, but experimentation cannot be in Charlie’s best interests unless there is a prospect of benefit for him.’

Judges:

Francis J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 972 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wyatt and Another v Portsmouth Hospital NHS and Another CA 12-Oct-2005
The appellants’ daughter had been born with very severe disabilities. Her doctors obtained an order allowing them a discretion not to ventilate her to keep her alive if necessary. She had improved, but the family now sought leave to appeal an order . .

Cited by:

Cited – Re Gard (A Child) FD 24-Jul-2017
The baby boy suffered life threatening conditions. Doctors at the hospital sought directions to allow the withdrawal of life support. His parents wanted him to be given the chance of experimental treatment in the US. In April a declaration had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Health

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588142

A v Cornwall Council: QBD 28 Apr 2017

Allegation that the local council had resisted A’s contact with his child after he had published blogs with opinions as to abortion and same sex marriages.
Held: A had not demonstrated that the response of the social worker had been as claimed. Though there were criticisms, there was no infringement of the claimant’s human rights.

Judges:

Dingemans J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 842 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Local Government, Human Rights

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.584200

Buckinghamshire County Council v Andrew and Others: FC 26 Apr 2017

The court has been concerned with a fact-finding hearing relating to a little girl named Effie Stillwell born in late spring 2016. Her mother is Carla Andrews and her father Craig Stillwell. She was made the subject of an emergency protection order made on 18th August 2016. She has remained in foster care under interim care orders. Effie is the only child of her young parents. The father shares parental responsibility through registration. The parents remain in a committed relationship.

Citations:

[2017] EWFC B19

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.583671