Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Children - From: 1991 To: 1991

This page lists 16 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.

 
Re K [1991] 1 WLR 431
1991


Children
The natural bond and relationship between parent and child gives rise to universally recognized norms which ought not to be gratuitously interfered with and which, if interfered with at all, ought to be so only if the welfare of the child dictates it.
1 Citers


 
F v Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council [1991] Fam 69; [1991] 2 WLR 1132
1991
CA
Ralph Gibson LJ
Children, Damages
The local authority took children into care, reassuring the parents that they would be returned. They were not. Held: There was no valid claim for damages for the distress arising from the loss of the company of a child. There was no cause of action in negligence. The authority was working within a statutory framework.
Ralph Gibson LJ said: "If there should be deliberate injury to a parent with reference to care or custody of her child, whether by deceit or by misfeasance in public office, it would not follow that, because there is no cause of action in negligence for loss of parental right, damages could not be recovered for such deliberate injury and its consequences."
Children Act 1948
1 Citers


 
V v B (A Minor) (Abduction) [1991] 1 FLR 177
1991

Sir Stephen Brown P
Children
The mother of a child sought return of her son to Australia. The child was born in New Zealand, then came to England and the family then went to Australia. The father brought him back to England by subterfuge. He now denied the child had any habitual residence in Australia, and asserted that he would suffer psychological harm if sent to Australia. Held: 'Habitual' and 'ordinary' residence' were to be defined the same. Though the father denied the return to Australia had been intended to be permanent, the mother had established sufficient to show habitual residence before removal. Australian law gave the mother custodial rights at the time of removal. The words 'grave risk' did not mean the same as paramount welfare, and was to be established by different courts with different criteria.
Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
1 Citers


 
Re S (A Minor) (Abduction) [1991] 2 FLR 1
1991
CA
Lady Justice Butler-Sloss, Children
The court considered what would constitute a child being 'settled' under the 1985 Act: "I now turn to the last matter, which is art. 12, as to whether in these circumstances it has been demonstrated that Katharine in now settled in her new environment. Mr Karsten submitted that the President made no finding on this matter. I have read the relevant passages from his judgment. It is perfectly clear that he considered art. 12 at some length, and that he considered the submissions of counsel and, as I have said, before he started the hearing had been fully acquainted with the documents and the history. The countervailing submissions as to whether Katharine could really be said to be settled in this environment, looking at the historical record of the mother and the numerous movements and schools and so on, must be a matter of considerable debate. For my part, I would not disturb the approach that the President has made on this aspect of the case. He made a specific finding on the matter. The purpose of art. 12 is to give relief where the period which has passed between the wrongful removal and the application is more than one year. If in those circumstances it is demonstrated that the child is settled, there is no longer an obligation to return the child forthwith but, subject to the overall discretion of art. 18, the court may or may not order such a return. Bearing in mind the many moves to which our attention is drawn by Miss Scotland, for my part, I would not consider that it had been demonstrated that Katharine was settled in the new environment. There was from April 1989, and certainly August 1989, a dispute going on with which she must have been concerned about her future and where she was to live. She had established, it is obvious, a relationship with her half-sister, who had come through many of the other vicissitudes with her. But to say that within art. 12 it is demonstrated that there was a long-term settled position in the environment in England is, in my view, a difficult question upon which to be satisfied. Sir Stephen Brown P was not satisfied. I, for my part, would not disturb his decision on that matter. In any event, in all the circumstances of the case, Sir Stephen Brown P exercised his discretion within art. 18, and observed the underlying comity of this Convention in supporting, rather than interfering with, a foreign court properly seized with the management and control of the welfare of Katharine who had been under its jurisdiction as a result of divorce proceedings which took place in that court."
Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 12
1 Citers



 
 In Re H (Minors) (Abduction): Custody Rights; HL 1991 - [1991] 2 AC 476; [1991] 2 FLR 109
 
Re R (A Minor) (Expert's Evidence) [1991] 1 FLR 291
1991
FD

Children, Evidence
The court gave guidance on the principles to be followed by experts providing evidence in children cases.
1 Citers


 
Russell v Russell 1991 SCLR 429
1991

Sherriff Gordon
Scotland, Children

1 Cites

1 Citers


 
In re R (Wardship: Criminal Proceedings) [1991] Fam 56
1991


Children
Lord Brightman said: "Although the prerogative jurisdiction of the High Court in wardship cases remains, nevertheless the exercise of that jurisdiction has been and must continue to be treated as circumscribed by the existence of the statutory code. Therefore, where the court perceives that the action sought of it is within the sphere of discretion of the local authority, there is generally no case for the existence of a wardship order. It is not the function of the High Court to supersede the statutory code, or to control the exercise by the local authority of discretions committed by Parliament to that body, or to supervise the exercise of the statutory powers of the local authority, except within the limits of judicial review."
1 Citers


 
C v C (A Minor) (Custody: Appeal) [1991] 1 FLR 223
1991


Children

1 Citers


 
Re H (A Minor) (Custody: Interim Care and Control) [1991] 2 FLR 109
1991
CA
Butler-Sloss LJ, Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR
Children
Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR said: "So it is not a case of parental right opposed to the interests of the child, with an assumption that parental right prevails unless there are strong reasons in terms of the interests of the child. It is the same test which is being applied, the welfare of the child. And all that Re K is saying, as I understand it, is that of course, there is a strong supposition that, other things being equal, it is in the interests of the child that it shall remain with its natural parents. But that has to give way to particular needs in particular situations."
Children Act 1989
1 Citers


 
Regina v B County Council, ex parte P [1991] 1 WLR 221
1991
CA
Butler-Sloss LJ
Children
Application was made for judicial review of a decision of the magistrate in proceedings under the Children and Young Persons Act. The issue arose as to whether or not young children should be compelled to give evidence. Held. The decision of the magistrate not to compel the witness was not reviewable.
Butler-Sloss LJ said that the issue depended upon whether attendance would be oppressive, but added: "Research has shown the adverse effects upon some children of the requirement to give evidence in cases of sexual abuse. In cases of young children, such harm may well be inferred: see the Report of the Advisory Group on Video Evidence 1989. The introduction of the Order of 1990 [I interpolate that permits the giving of hearsay evidence] clearly envisages an alternative to oral evidence and cross-examination and to make it possible for children making allegations of, inter alia, sexual abuse to do so without the additional stress of a court hearing. The philosophy behind the Children Act 1989 would be thwarted by the ability of the alleged abuser himself being able to require the attendance of the child at court. A court should be very cautious in requiring the attendance of a child in these cases, reinforced as it must be by considerations as to how to deal with a refusal to give evidence after the issue of the summons."
1 Citers


 
D v Hereford and Worcester County Council [1991] Fam 14
1991
FD
Ward J
Children
The court considered an application for an order for parental rights under the 1967 Act. Held: Ward J said: "Can this (father) show that he is the father of the child, not in the biological sense but in the sense that he has established or is likely to establish such a real family tie with the [child] that he should now be accorded the corresponding legal tie? It would be easier to ask under the Children Act 1989, but the essence is the same: "has he behaved, or will he behave, with parental responsibility for this child?" These real links are not established simply on proof of, or acknowledgement of, paternity."
Family Law Act 1967 4
1 Citers


 
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council v A [1991] 2 FLR 192
1991

Mr Justice Douglas Brown
Children, Media
Ten children were taken into care amid allegations of ritual satanic sex abuse. Held: the allegations were not proved. All but four of the children were returned home. Injunctions were granted to protect the identify of the children and of the social workers involved. As to the actions of the social workers: "the local authority employees I have been concerned with are decent people. They are not heartless or ruthless. They acted throughout with the best interests of these children in mind as they saw them. Nevertheless mistakes were made and it is greatly to their credit that most of them have been acknowledged."
Children Act 1989
1 Citers


 
Re N (Minors) (Abduction) [1991] 1 FLR 413
2 Jan 1991
FD
Bracewell J
Children
The court considered the degree of settlement that had to be proved under the Act: "The second question which has arisen is: what is the degree of settlement which has to be demonstrated? There is some force, I find, in the argument that legal presumptions reflect the norm, and the presumption under the Convention is that children should be returned unless the mother can establish the degree of settlement which is more than mere adjustment to surroundings. I find that word should be given its ordinary natural meaning, and that the word 'settled' in this context has two constituents. First, it involves a physical element of relating to, being established in, a community and an environment. Secondly, I find that it has an emotional constituent denoting security and stability. "and "The phrase 'long-term' was not defined, but I find that it is the opposite of 'transient' it requires a demonstration by a projection into the future, that the present position imports stability when looking at the future, and is permanent insofar as anything in life can be said to be permanent. What factors does the new environment encompass? The word 'new' is significant, and in my judgment it must encompass place, home, school, people, friends, activities and opportunities, but not, per se, the relationship with the mother, which has always existed in a close, loving attachment. That can only be relevant insofar as it impinges on the new surroundings. Every case must depend on its own peculiar facts…" As to article 18 and the question of whether the court retained a discretion to order the return of a child found to have been settled here for more than one year (Art 18): "The next matter arising is whether art. 12 is applicable to this case, and whether the mother has demonstrated that the two children have settled in their new environment…If the answer to that question is 'yes' then this court has a discretion under art. 18 as to whether or not the children should be ordered to return." and "in the event of the court being so satisfied, then a discretion arises under art. 18 as to whether or not to order the return of the children."
Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 5
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Re M (Minors); CA 17-Jan-1991 - [1991] EWCA Civ 14; [1992] 1 FCR 201; [1992] 2 FLR 382

 
 Re C (Minors); CA 23-Jul-1991 - [1991] EWCA Civ 10; [1992] 2 All ER 86; [1991] FCR 865; [1992] 1 FLR 1
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.