Category: Family

P and Others (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008) (No 2): FD 13 Oct 2017

Following the identification of various errors in the paperwork at a fertility treatment centre, the court had ordered an audit. That audit had taken place and a further few errors identified. However after further concerns, the HFEA had re-audited the centre’s files, with the results suggesting that the first audit had been inadequate. Complaints were now raised as to the contents of a standard letter sent by the doctor then in charge to the families affected.
Held: Problems as to legal parenthood arising from a lack of signed consent could not be resolved without a formal court order.
The Court also questioned the possibility that legal advice had een given to some clinics, that a statement of parental wishes might be signed in order to aleviate any question which might arise.

Judges:

Sir James Munby P FD

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2532 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Health Professions

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598966

Mazhar v The Lord Chancellor: FD 12 Oct 2017

The claimant had been subject to a without notice order allowing him to be taken against his will to hospital for treatment. He said that, having capacity himself, the court had no power to make such an order. A settlement of damages having been agreed, the court now considered whether a declaration as to the law was required, in particular as to whether the court’s jurisdiction was limited to cover only those without mental capacity.
Held:

Judges:

Sir Ernest Ryder, Senior President

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2536 (Fam), [2017] WLR(D) 680

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5 6 8, Mental Capacity Act 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Human Rights

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598965

Wilmot v Maughan: CA 27 Oct 2017

The husband appeals from Mostyn J’s order of 13th January 2016 by which he dismissed the husband’s deemed application to set aside all orders made in the proceedings since 2010. The substantive proceedings are financial remedy proceedings in which the wife has made a number of enforcement applications.

Judges:

Black, Sales, Moylan LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1668

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598469

Moses-Taiga v Taiga: CA 5 Jul 2005

Thorpe LJ said: ‘the absence of . . authority . . only illustrates the tendency for propositions of universal acceptance to be difficult to support by reference to authority.’

Judges:

Thorpe LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1013, [2006] 1 FLR 1074

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Main Judgment – Moses-Taiga v Taiga CA 23-Sep-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.229731

Hart v Hart: CA 31 Aug 2017

‘This case concerns the approach which the court should take to non-matrimonial property when determining a financial remedy claim by application of the sharing principle.’

Judges:

Lloyd Jones, Beatson, Moylan LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1306, [2017] WLR(D) 585

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.594987

Cherwayko v Cherwayko: FD 10 Dec 2014

Application by W for alleged contempt of Court by H in failing to comply with court orders made as to the provision of financial statement on her application for financial provision on their divorce.

Judges:

Mostyn J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 4252 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Contempt of Court

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.539951

W v Middlesborough Borough Council (Exclusion Order: Evidence): FD 4 Aug 2000

When an application was made to exclude somebody from their home, the statement of facts in support must not only detail the factual material, but also refer to the evidence which supported, in appropriate cases, the relevant provisions under the Act. The statement must also be clear as to what was required of the respondent. It was wrong to imprison the applicant for a breach of a court order which had clearly no longer been appropriate at the time of the breach.

Citations:

Times 04-Aug-2000

Statutes:

Children Act 1989, Family Proceedings Court (Children Act 1989) Rules 1991 (SI 1991/1397)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.90212

B v L: FC 20 Oct 2016

H, a devout Muslim, objected to the English court dealing with the divorce proceedings brought by W. He said that under Sharia law, any proceedings had to occur in Pakistan.
Held: The court had jurisdiction. There was clear evidence that the law of divorce in Pakistan was discriminatory, and that W would have less rights there. Though both parties had dual English and Pakistani nationality both were clearly resident here.

Judges:

Francis J

Citations:

[2016] EWFC 67

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Jurisdiction

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.592356

Sadovska and Another v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 26 Jul 2017

The parties had applied to be married. S was a European citizen, and the intended groom was an overstayer from Pakistan. They were refused a licence, and taken into custody, and now appealed against refusal of a licence.
Held: The appeal succeeded. It was for the Home Office to prove what it asserted: ‘One of the most basic rules of litigation is that he who asserts must prove. . . It was not for her [Sadovksa] to establish that her relationship with Mr Malik was a genuine and lasting one, but for the Secretary of State to establish that it fell within the definition of a marriage of convenience.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 54, [2017] 1 WLR 2926, [2017] WLR(D) 556, 2017 GWD 23-396, 2017 SLT 883, UKSC 2017/0031

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summ Vide, SC Video AM, SC Video PM

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – The Scottish Ministers v Stirton and Another SCS 7-Nov-2014
These proceedings concern the civil recovery of the proceeds of unlawful conduct, notably money laundering, extortion and mortgage fraud, in terms of section 266 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The reclaimer contended that the crown had not had . .
Cited – Papajorgji (EAA Spouse – Marriage of Convenience) Greece UTIAC 6-Jan-2012
i) There is no burden at the outset of an application on a claimant to demonstrate that a marriage to an EEA national is not one of convenience.
ii) IS (marriages of convenience) Serbia [2008] UKAIT 31 establishes only that there is an . .
Cited – Sadovska and Another v The Secretary of State for The Home Department SCS 7-Jul-2016
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Family

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.591176

Sharp v Sharp: CA 13 Jun 2017

W appealed against a financial remedies award achieving equality between herself and H. The marriage had not been a long one and they had no children. W challenged the imposition of an equal sharing principle.
Held: W’s appeal succeeded. Section 25 required the court in every case to look at all the circumstances, and the automatic imposition of a principle of equality was an impermissible judicial gloss on the statute. W’s greater wealth had been generated not from any

Judges:

McFarlane , McCombe , David Richards LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 408, [2017] WLR(D) 397

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588203