Category: Children

In re T (Wardship: Review of Police Protection Decision) (No 2): FD 2008

The court considered promises of confidentiality given by expert witneses to children.
Held: Full disclosure should be made to the court of the relevant material, and the court should then decide whether the ECHR Article 6 rights of the parties require disclosure

McFarlane J
[2010] 1 FLR 1026, [2008] EWHC 196 (Fam)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Re A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Police

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.588170

Re V (A Child): CA 12 Oct 2004

The local authority had succeeded in its application for a freeing order, but the judge had also found that it had infringed the parents human riights by the way it had acted toward them before the birth of V, and had awarded sums of damages for that breach. The authority appealed against that finding.
Held: The order was indeed extraordinary. The appeal was allowed.

Thorpe, Wall, LJJ, Holman J
[2004] EWCA Civ 1575, [2006] 2 FCR 121, [2005] 1 FLR 627, [2005] Fam Law 201, [2005] UKHRR 144
Bailii
England and Wales

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572364

Elliott v Ratcliffe: FD 1 Feb 2013

The claimant sought a declaration of parentage in respect of a child under the 1986 Act, saying that he was not the father. Directions were given for a company to take samples, but instead the company requested the various parties to attend their own doctors for the samples to be taken. The parties disputed the validity of the chain of custody of the samples.
Held: The service may be adequate when parties wish to undertake private checks of paternity, but that was not what the court had ordered. The case would require adjournment for further evidence.

Holman J
[2013] EWHC 806 (Fam)
Bailii
Family Law Act 1986 55A
England and Wales

Children, Evidence

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.472577

D and L (Minors Surrogacy), Re: FD 28 Sep 2012

The children had been born in India to a surrogate mother. The biological father and his civil partner sought a parental order. The mother could not be found to give her consent. She had been provided anonymously through a clinic.
Held: The request was granted, and a retrospective authorisation given for the making of payments for the surrogacy: ‘the twin’s welfare unquestionably will be enhanced by the making of parental orders. I am satisfied that these Applicants acted in good faith and have been entirely candid in all of their dealings with the Court and the other authorities.’. The 2010 Regulations had introduced a new situation. Here the applicants had taken appropriate and reasonable steps to seek the mother, but without success.
Baker J summarised the position as regards the effect of having a paid surrogacy: ‘(1) The question whether a payment exceeds the level of ‘reasonable expenses’ is a matter of fact in each case. There is no conventionally- recognised quantum of expenses or capital sum: Re L, supra.
(2) The principles underpinning section 54 (8), which must be respected by the court, is that it is contrary to public policy to sanction excessive payments that effectively amount to buying children from overseas: Re S, supra.
(3) On the other hand, as a result of the changes brought about by the 2010 Regulations, the decision whether to authorise payments retrospectively is a decision relating to a parental order and in making that decision, the court must regard the children’s welfare as the paramount consideration: Re L, supra, and Re X and Y (2011), supra, per the President.
(4) It is almost impossible to imagine a set of circumstances in which, by the time an application for a parental order comes to court, the welfare of any child, particularly a foreign child, would not be gravely compromised by a refusal to make the order: per Hedley J in Re X and Y (2008), approved by the President in Re X and Y (2011) at paragraph 40. It follows that: ‘it will only be in the clearest case of the abuse of public policy that the court will be able to withhold an order if otherwise welfare considerations support its making’, per Hedley J in Re L at paragraph 10.
(5) Where the Applicants for a parental order are acting in good faith, with no attempt to defraud the authorities, and the payments are not so disproportionate that the granting of parental orders would be an affront to public policy, it will ordinarily be appropriate to give retrospective authorisation, having regard to the paramountcy of the children’s welfare. !

Baker J
[2012] EWHC 2631 (Fam)
Bailii, Gazette
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 54, Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Parental Orders) Regulations 2010 10
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – In re L (A Minor) (Commercial Surrogacy) FD 8-Dec-2010
The child had been born in Illinois as a result of a commercial surrogacy arrangement which would have been unlawful here. The parents applied for a parental order under the 2008 Act.
Held: The order was made, but in doing so he court had to . .
Cited – In re X and Y (Foreign Surrogacy) FD 9-Dec-2008
The court considered the approval required for an order under the 2002 Act.
Held: Welfare considerations were important but not paramount: ‘Given the permanent nature of the order under s.30, it seems reasonable that the court should adopt the . .
Cited – In Re G (A Minor) (Interim Care Order: Residential Assessment); G (Children), In Re (Residence: Same Sex Partner) HL 26-Jul-2006
The parties had been a lesbian couple each with children. Each now was in a new relationship. One registered the two daughters of the other at a school now local to her but without first consulting the birth mother, who then applied for residence . .
Cited – In re X and Y (Parental Order: Retrospective Authorisation of Payments) FD 6-Dec-2011
An application had been made for parental orders under section 57. The children X and Y had been born in India under surrogacy arrangements involving payments which were lawful in India, but which went beyond what could be paid.
Held: The . .
Cited – In Re S (Parental Order) FD 2009
Hedley J considered a Californian surrogacy arrangement in which USD $23,000 was paid.
Held: Hedley J considered the issue of authorisation in respect of a payment for a commercial surrogacy arrangement and set out further the approach the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Health

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.464867

Birmingham City Council v Riaz and Others: FD 24 Jun 2015

The Council sought a lifelong order to protect the identity of a girl about to achieve majority, who have been subject to sexual exploitation as a child.
Held: Keehan J said: ‘There comes a point, however, where evidence is not merely speculative but is pure speculation, even from experienced professionals, with no sound or cogent underlying evidential basis. Given the Draconian and wide ranging nature of RROs, I am of the view that evidence of this nature will not be sufficient or adequate to provide an evidential basis to justify the making of an order.’

Keehan J
[2015] EWHC 1857 (Fam)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – H v A (No2) FD 17-Sep-2015
The court had previously published and then withdrawn its judgment after third parties had been able to identify those involved by pulling together media and internet reports with the judgment.
Held: The judgment case should be published in . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Children

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.550344

Re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): FD 19 Feb 2003

A trial judge had refused an order that steps should not be taken so as to allow S to be identified in reporting the trial of his mother for the alleged murder of his brother by salt poisoning.
Held: The court dismissed the application for an injunction restraining the publication by newspapers of the identity of a defendant in a murder trial which had been intended to protect the privacy of her son who is not involved in the criminal proceedings. Section 39 was inapplicable because S was not a ‘child concerned in the proceedings, either as being the person by or against or in respect of whom the proceedings were taken, or as being a witness therein’. ‘First I recognise the primacy in a democratic society of the open reporting of public proceedings on grave criminal charges and the inevitable price that that involves in incursions on the privacy of individuals. Secondly, I recognise that Parliament has in a number of statutes qualified that right to report and, in the context of this case, most notably in section 39 of the 1933 Act; where a set of circumstances arise not covered by those provisions the court should in my judgment be slow to extend the incursion into the right of free speech by the use of the inherent jurisdiction. Thirdly, I have to recognise that not even the restrictions contended for here offer real hope to CS of proper isolation from the fallout of publicity at this trial; it is inevitable that those who know him will identify him and thus frustrate the purpose of the restriction. Lastly, I am simply not convinced that, when everything is drawn together and weighed, it can be said that grounds under article 10(2) of the ECHR have been made out in terms of the balance of the effective preservation of CS’s article 8 rights against the right to publish under article 10. I should add, although it is not strictly necessary to do so, that I think I would have come to the same conclusion even had I been persuaded that this was a case where CS’s welfare was indeed my paramount consideration under section 1(1) of the 1989 Act.’ The newspapers were not to be prevented in reports of the criminal trial from publishing the identity of the defendant or her deceased son or photographs of them.

Hedley J
[2003] EWHC 254 (Fam)
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 839
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – In re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) CA 10-Jul-2003
An order was sought to protect from publicity a child whose mother faced trial for the murder of his brother. The child was now in care.
Held: The court must balance the need to protect the child with the need for freedom of the press. The . .
At first instance – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, criminal Practice, Children, Human Rights

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.219020

CW v NT and Another: FD 21 Jan 2011

The mother had entered into a surrogacy arrangement to be inseminated, and give birth to the child, but then declined to transfer the child. The intended parents now sought a residence order. Payments had been made toward expenses, but no written agreement had been entered into.
Held: None of the three principals had been frank with the court. Even so, the mother’s change of heart and decision to keep the child seemed genuine. The prospective parents showed a worrying lack of insight into the child’s needs, and had misled the court about their past attempts at surrogacy. The court asked itself in which home was T most likely to mature into a happy and balanced adult and to achieve her fullest potential as a human. Such cases must each turn on their own facts. In this case there were real doubts about the applicants’ ability to provide for the child’s emotional needs. T should stay with her mother.

Baker J
[2011] EWHC 33 (Fam)
Bailii
Children Act 1989, Surrogacy Arrangements Act 1985, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2010
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – In Re P (Surrogacy: Residence) FD 2008
A mother had five children, but by different fathers. The last two under surrogacy arrangements. The first of these two was conceived after artificial insemination. During the pregnancy she told the biological father and his wife that she had . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.428196

Re O (A minor) (Medical Treatment): FD 12 Apr 1993

The local authority applied for a care order in relation to the child, on the ground that there was an urgent and continuing need for medical treatment which included blood transfusions. The court considered the legal effect of a parent’s belief (as Jehovah’s Witesses) that medical treatment by blood transfusion is forbidden by the Bible and is sinful, even if it is the only means of saving life.
Held: Wardship was refused. Johhnson J rejected the ‘specific issue’ route on the ground that the trial of an ‘issue’ arguably required the preliminary step of giving directions, and that in an emergency, an issue could not be determined on an ex parte basis.
Johnson J said: ‘Counsel submitted that it was wholly inappropriate for the court to make even an interim care order where the child’s parents were caring, committed and capable and only this one issue arose for decision, albeit one of the gravest significance. Reflecting on the statutory provisions, and in particular section 33 (of the Children Act 1989), I accept that joint submission.’

Johnson J
Ind Summary 12-Apr-1993, [1993] 2 FLR 149
Children Act 1989 33
England and Wales
Cited by:
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 – LA v SB and Others CA 12-Jul-2010
The local authority had applied for a care order under the court’s inherent wardship jurisdiction in connection with a family where three children suffered a potentially life threatening disease, Rasmussens’s encephalitis. The parents were said to . .
Cited – In Re T (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) CA 24-Oct-1996
A baby boy who was 18 months old, suffered from a life-threatening liver defect. His parents were health-care professionals experienced in the care of sick children. The unanimous medical view was that as soon as donor liver became available the . .
Cited – Camden London Borough Council v R (A Minor) (Blood Transfusion); in Re R (A Minor)(Blood Transfusion) FD 8-Jun-1993
Child A’s doctors considered that she would need treatment over the following two years and that this could involve the need for blood transfusions at any time. The parents were Jehovah’s Witnesses and refused consent.
Held: The order allowing . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Health, Ecclesiastical

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.223026

Emma R v Edward R: FD 10 Nov 2004

Mother’s application for residence order allowing the children to live with her in Paris.

Baron J
[2004] EWHC 2572 (Fam)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Payne v Payne; P v P CA 13-Feb-2001
No presumption for Mother on Relocation
The mother applied for leave to return to New Zealand taking with the parties’ daughter aged four. The father opposed the move, saying that allowing the move would infringe his and the child’s right to family life. He had been refused residence.
Children

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.221050

C v FC (Children Proceedings: Costs): FD 2004

Practice in the Family Division has departed from the ‘costs follow the event’ principle in significant respects. The court brought together recent cases on this topic.

Rex Tedd QC
[2004] 1 FLR 362
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Costs

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.223258

Child and Family Agency v D (RPD Intervening): ECJ 27 Oct 2016

ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in the matters of parental responsibility – Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 – Article 15 – Transfer of a case to a court of another Member State – Scope – Conditions under which applicable – Court better placed – Best interests of the child

L. Bay Larsen, P
ECLI:EU:C:2016:819, [2016] EUECJ C-428/15, [2017] 2 WLR 949, [2017] ILPr 5, [2017] Fam 248, [2017] 1 FCR 320, [2016] WLR(D) 555, [2017] 1 FLR 223
Bailii, WLRD
European
Citing:
See Also – In Re N (Children) SC 13-Apr-2016
The Court considered whether the future of two little girls, aged four and two years, should be decided by the courts of this country or by the authorities in Hungary. Both children were born in England and lived all their lives here. But their . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Children

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.571243

GK v PR: FC 14 Dec 2021

Within private law proceedings concerning the welfare of the parties’ son who is now 2 years and 8 months old, the mother appeals against the decision of a Recorder whereby, after a fact-finding hearing he dismissed a wide range of allegations of domestic abuse made against the father.

Mr Justice Peel
[2021] EWFC 106
Bailii
England and Wales

Children

Updated: 25 January 2022; Ref: scu.671047

S and J, Regina (on The Application of) v The London Borough of Haringey: Admn 28 Oct 2016

Application for judicial review of a decision by the London Borough of Haringey that the Claimants were not children in need for the purposes of Part III of the Children Act 1989

Neil Cameron QC
[2016] EWHC 2692 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Children, Immigration

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570551

Re SO: FD 1 Apr 2015

Application for an order in wardship proceedings, or alternatively under the court’s inherent jurisdiction, which would have the effect of amending an existing injunction previously made in the wardship proceedings and extending its duration beyond the ward’s 18th birthday.

Baker J
[2015] EWHC 935 (Fam), [2015] Fam Law 891, [2016] 1 All ER 1021, [2016] 1 FLR 1144, [2016] Fam 333, [2016] 3 WLR 716, [2016] 1 FCR 447
Bailii
England and Wales

Children

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.549008

Central Bedfordshire Council v Markwick and Another: FD 12 Oct 2016

Application for the committal of the respondents for contempt of court, having made public matters relating to ourt proceedings involving their grandchildren.
Held: There was insufficient proof, against a straight denial, that the respondents had themselves done the acts complained of, and the complaint failed.

Holman J
[2016] EWHC 2540 (Fam)
Bailii
England and Wales

Children, Contempt of Court

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570273