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: 1995 To: 1995
This page lists 61 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.
In Re K (Abduction: Consent: Forum Conveniens); 1995 - [1995] 2 FLR 211
Re P (Terminating Parental Responsibility) [1995] 3 FCR 753
1995
FD
Singer J
Children
The court considered an applicaion for the termination of parental resonsibility for the father.
Children Act 1989
MH v GP (Child: Emigration) [1995] 2 FLR 106
1995
FD
Thorpe J
Children
A single mother wanted to move permanently to New Zealand with her four year old son. The father had regular contact with his son. Held. The application failed. The Judge stressed the importance of the child's relationship with the father and through him with the paternal family.
Thorpe J said: "in approaching the first question, whether or not there should be leave for permanent removal, I apply the principles which have stood largely unchanged since the decision of the Court of Appeal in Poel v Poel. In the later case of Chamberlain v de la Mare a strong Court of Appeal stated that, in considering whether to give leave, the welfare of the child was the first and paramount consideration, but that leave should not be withheld unless the interests of the children and those of the custodial parent were clearly shown to be incompatible.
That statement of principle creates a presumption in favour of the reasonable application of the custodial parent, but in weighing whether the reasonable application is or is not incompatible with the welfare of D, I have to assess the importance of the relationship between D and his father, not only as it is but as it should develop. The relationship with the father is the doorway through which D relates to other members of the family, particularly his half-sister L, his paternal grandmother, and his paternal first cousins. That is the crux of this case."
1 Citers
Soucie v Soucie (1995) SLT 414
1995
Scotland, Children
After noting the approval of In re N in Perrin the court added: "Furthermore the question of settlement had to be considered in the context of the spirit of the Convention whereby the fundamental duty of the court is to order a return of the child to the proper jurisdiction when there has been a wrongful removal or retention." The court considered whether any discretion remained to make an order after the one year period under Art 18: "Such a balancing exercise may be appropriate when considering the discretionary powers of the court under Article 18, which will come into play if the proviso to Article 12 is established or indeed if any of the matters contained in Article 13, which will come into play if the proviso to Article 12 is established or indeed if any of the matters contained in Article 13 are established." and "We should add that we were addressed on the matter of discretion which would have arisen under Article 18 if we had been satisfied that either of the main issues should be decided in favour of the respondent."
Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 5
1 Cites
1 Citers
In re W (Wardship: Discharge: Publicity); CA 1995 - [1995] 2 FLR 466
In re G (A Minor)(Care Order: Threshold Conditions); FD 1995 - [1995] Fam 16
In re A (Wardship jurisdiction) [1995] 1 FLR 767
1995
Children
1 Citers
Ex parte Crook [1995] 1 WLR 139
1995
CA
Glidewell LJ
Children, Media
A criminal court trying parents for the manslaughter of one child and cruelty to three others had made an order under section 39 prohibiting the identification of the surviving children. The judge expressed the view that identifying the parents or the dead child would lead to the identification of the surviving children. Two journalists appealed. Held: "We entirely agree . . . that as a general proposition there is a strong and proper public interest in knowing the identity of those who have committed crimes, particularly serious and detestable crimes. If, as the appellants suggest, there is a growing tendency for the court to use or misuse their powers to prevent the disclosure of the identity of defendants or other persons concerned in criminal proceedings, we are as concerned as they to restrict such a tendency and to ensure that such orders are only made when they are justified." The court also pointed out that the media were free to take the risk and disregard the judge's advice that identifying the parents or the dead child would be in breach of the order, although in practice what he had said was 'obviously correct'. In making his order, the judge was required to weigh the interest in the full reporting of the crime, 'including the identification of the defendants', against the need to protect the victims from further harm. He was persuaded that the likely harm to the children outweighed the restrictions on freedom to publish. The Court of Appeal, dismissing the appeal, said that on the evidence before him the judge was clearly correct. Thus, while there is undoubtedly an importance public interest in the identification of defendants, in particular those found guilty of serious crimes, there are circumstances in which it can be outweighed by the need to protect their victims from further harm.
1 Citers
Re S and D (Child Care Powers of the Court ); CA 1995 - [1995] 1 FCR 626
Re AB (Child Abuse: Expert Witnesses) [1995] 1 FLR 181
1995
FD
Children, Evidence
1 Citers
In Re M (A Minor) (Local Authority's Costs); FD 9-Jan-1995 - Ind Summary, 09 January 1995; [1995] 1 FLR 533
In Re T (A Minor) (Contact Order); In Re T (Adoption: Contact) Times, 13 January 1995; [1995] 2 FLR 251
13 Jan 1995
CA
Butler-Sloss LJ
Children, Adoption
A contact order which was not strictly necessary should not be made in adoption proceedings. Arrangements for contact should not be "imposed" upon the adoptive parents but should be "left to their good sense so that they could be trusted to do what they believe to be in the best interests of their daughter." Butler-Sloss LJ indicated that the court could intervene in future and make an order if the adoptive parents were to behave unreasonably
Adoption Act 1976
1 Citers
Re Children Act 1989 Re C Ind Summary, 23 January 1995
23 Jan 1995
FD
Children
Guidance was given on expert medical evidence in children cases and administrative procedures.
Children Act 1989
In Re W (A Minor)(Welfare Reports: Appeals); CA 25-Jan-1995 - Times, 25 January 1995
B v B (Minors) (Variation of Order for Periodical Payments) Times, 30 December 1994; Ind Summary, 30 January 1995
30 Jan 1995
FD
Children
Variation of maintenance order was possible under provisions of an earlier Act despite its repeal - lacuna cured.
Guardianship of Minors Act 1970 - Guardianship of Minors Act 1971
In Re D (A Minor)(Contact: Interim Order) Times, 01 February 1995
1 Feb 1995
FD
Children
Interim contact orders are to be made cautiously where dispute as to contact.
Oxfordshire County Council v P (A Minor) Times, 08 February 1995; Independent, 03 February 1995
3 Feb 1995
FD
Legal Professions, Children
A confession to a guardian ad litem in care proceedings is confidential to those proceedings.
Children Act 1989 98
In Re H (Minors: Prohibited Steps Order) Independent, 09 February 1995; Times, 08 February 1995
8 Feb 1995
CA
Children
A prohibited steps order is available if necessary against a non-party.
Children Act 1989 8
Liverpool City Council v B Ind Summary, 27 February 1995; Times, 10 February 1995
10 Feb 1995
FD
Children
Criminal Justice Act 1991 60(3) - Children Act 1989 25
In Re C (Minors) (Contact: Jurisdiction); CA 15-Feb-1995 - Times, 15 February 1995
In Re F (A Minor) (Child Abduction: Risk If Returned); CA 15-Feb-1995 - Times, 15 February 1995
In Re P (A Minor)(Child Abduction: Declaration); CA 16-Feb-1995 - Times, 16 February 1995
Practice Direction (Child: Change of Surname) Times, 17 February 1995
17 Feb 1995
QBD
Children
The consent of the other parent was required on an application to the court for a change of a child's name.
In Re J (A Minor) (Specific Issue Order) Times, 21 February 1995
21 Feb 1995
FD
Children
The court does not have the power to dictate how a Local Authority should exercise care it had undertaken of a child.
In Re S (A Minor) (Parental Responsibility); CA 22-Feb-1995 - Times, 22 February 1995
Practice Direction: Change by Deed Poll of Surname of Child Gazette, 01 March 1995
1 Mar 1995
QBD
Children
Lists consents required to be lodged with deed poll changing child's surname.
McMichael v United Kingdom; ECHR 2-Mar-1995 - Times, 02 March 1995; (1995) 20 EHRR 205; 16424/90; [1995] ECHR 8
In Re A (A Minor) (Contact Application: Grandparent) Times, 06 March 1995
6 Mar 1995
CA
Children
Leave to grandparents to apply for contact gives no presumption for contact.
Regina v Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Committee Ex Parte B Independent, 14 March 1995; Times, 15 March 1995; [1995] 1 WLR 898; [1995] EWCA Civ 43; [1995] EWCA Civ 49; [1995] Fam Law 480; [1995] 6 Med LR 250; [1995] 1 FLR 1056; [1995] 2 FCR 485; [1995] 2 All ER 129; [1995] COD 407
10 Mar 1995
CA
Sir Thomas Bingham MR
Health, Children
A decision by a Health Authority to withhold treatment for a patient could be properly so made. It was not ordinarily to be a matter for lawyers. A Health Authority's withholding of treatment, which might not be in a child's simple best interests could even so be lawful, but when called upon, it would have to show substantial cause for its decisions.
Where the use of limited resources has to be decided, the undesirability of the court stepping in too quickly was made clear: (Sir Thomas Bingham MR) "I have no doubt that in a perfect world any treatment which a patient, or a patient's family, sought would be provided if doctors were willing to give it, no matter how much it cost, particularly when a life was potentially at stake. It would however, in my view, be shutting one's eyes to the real world if the court were to proceed on the basis that we do live in such a world. It is common knowledge that health authorities of all kinds are constantly pressed to make ends meet. They cannot pay their nurses as much as they would like; they cannot provide all the treatments they would like; they cannot purchase all the extremely expensive medical equipment they would like; they cannot carry out all the research they would like; they cannot build all the hospitals and specialist units they would like. Difficult and agonising judgments have to be made as to how a limited budget is best allocated to the maximum advantage of the maximum number of patients. That is not a judgment which the court can make. In my judgment, it is not something that a health authority such as this authority can be fairly criticised for not advancing before the court."
Sir Thomas Bingham MR: '. . . the courts are not, contrary to what is sometimes believed, arbiters as to the merits of cases of this kind. Were we to express opinions as to the likelihood of the effectiveness of medical treatment, or as to the merits of medical judgment, then we should be straying far from the sphere which under our constitution is accorded to us. We have one function only, which is to rule upon the lawfulness of decisions. That is a function to which we should strictly confine ourselves.'
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Re M (Minors: Interview) Ind Summary, 13 March 1995
13 Mar 1995
FD
Children
Father D's lawyers may interview child - child's welfare not sole or overriding.
Re F (Minors) (Contact: Restraint On Applications) Gazette, 15 March 1995
15 Mar 1995
CA
Children
Power to restrain applications for contact not to be used save for oppression.
Children Act 1989 91(14)
C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions; HL 17-Mar-1995 - Times, 17 March 1995; Independent, 21 March 1995; (1995) Cr App R 136; [1995] UKHL 15; [1996] AC 1; [1995] RTR 261; [1995] 2 All ER 43; [1995] 2 WLR 383; (1995) 159 JP 269; [1995] 1 FLR 933; [1995] Fam Law 400; [1995] Crim LR 801
In Re O (A Minor) (Contact: Imposition of Conditions) Times, 17 March 1995; [1995] 2 FLR 124
17 Mar 1995
CA
Sir Thomas Bingham MR
Children
The court may impose detailed conditions on the form of indirect contact. His Lordship set out the relevant principles: "1 Overriding all else, as provided by section 1(1) of the Children Act 1989, the welfare of the child was the paramount consideratin, and the court was concerned with the interests of the mother and the father only in so far as they bore on the welfare of the child.
2 It was almost always in the interests of a child whose parents were separated that he or she whould have contact with the parent with whom the child was not living.
3 The court had power to enforce orders for contact, which it should not hesitate to exercise where it judged that that would overall promote the welfare of the child to do so.
4 Cases did not, unhappily and infrequently but occasionally, arise in which a court was compelled to conclude that in existing circumstances an order for immediate direct contact should not be ordered, because so to order would injure the welfare of the child: see In re D (a Minor) (Contact: Mother's hostility)
5 In cases in which, for whatever reasons, direct contact could not for te time being be ordered, it was ordinarily highly desirable that there should be indirect contact so that the child grew up knowing of the love and interest of the absent parent with whom, in due course, direct contact should be established." After referring to In Re O: "The courts should not at all readily acept that the child's welfare will be injured by direct contact. Jodging that question, the court should take a medium-term and long-term view of the child's development and not accord excessive weight to what appear likely to be short-term or transient problems. Neither parent should be encouraged or permitted to think that the more unreasonable, the more obdurate and the more unco-operative they are, the more likely thay are to go their own way."
Children Act 1989 1(1) 11(7)
1 Cites
1 Citers
Re J (A Minor: Specific Issue Order) Ind Summary, 03 April 1995
3 Apr 1995
FD
Children
Whether child in special need not for Children Act s8 - must use Judicial Review.
Children Act 1989 8
In R K (A Minor) (Contact: Psychiatric Report) Times, 13 April 1995
13 Apr 1995
CA
Children
The court may not order a Local Authority having care of child to obtain a psychiatric report.
Children Act 1989 7
In re N (Minors: Residence) Ind Summary, 18 April 1995; Times, 06 April 1995; [1995] 2 FLR 230
18 Apr 1995
CA
Children
Hopeless appeals on residence orders require detachment and objectivity from legal advisers. Particularly in finely balanced matters a court of appeal should be slower to interfere in a decision.
1 Citers
Re L, Petitioners (Scots) Times, 21 April 1995
21 Apr 1995
IHCS
Children
Children being returned to parents after a long time in care need transitional arrangements to ease the return.
In Re M (Minors In Care) (Contact: Grandmother's Application); CA 21-Apr-1995 - Times, 21 April 1995; [1995] 2 FLR 86
Re L (A Minor); FD 24-Apr-1995 - Ind Summary, 24 April 1995
In Re L (Minors)(Police Investigation) (Privilege) Times, 25 April 1995
25 Apr 1995
CA
Children, Police
A report voluntarily given to a court hearing care proceedings, may be released to the police.
1 Citers
In Re R (A Minor) (Residence Order: Financial Considerations) Times, 10 May 1995
10 May 1995
CA
Children
Court may look at financial disadvantages of residence order including Child Support.
Re M (Minors: Grandparental Contact); CA 15-May-1995 - Ind Summary, 15 May 1995
Re O (A Minor) Ind Summary, 26 June 1995
26 Jun 1995
CA
Children
A court can order mother to send photographs and reports to father to maintain contact.
Children Act 1989 8 11(7)
Re S (Minors); CA 29-Jun-1995 - Independent, 29 June 1995
In Re TB (Minors) (Care Proceedings: Criminal Trial); CA 29-Jun-1995 - Times, 29 June 1995; [1995] 2 FLR 801
In Re L (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof); CA 3-Jul-1995 - Times, 03 July 1995
In Re S (Minors)(Care Order: Appeal) Times, 05 July 1995
5 Jul 1995
CA
Children
Appeal out of time against care order to be initially to first instance court.
In Re M (Minors) (Care Proceedings: Police Videos) Times, 07 July 1995
7 Jul 1995
FD
Children
Police are to produce child interview videos where these are properly required for care proceedings.
Re v (A Minor) Ind Summary, 24 July 1995
24 Jul 1995
CA
Children
A Judge may choose not to follow court the Court Welfare officer's recommendation with proper reasons.
In re Z (A Minor) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication); CA 31-Jul-1995 - [1997] Fam 1; [1996] 1 FLR 197; [1996] 2 WLR 88
Re C (A Minor) Ind Summary, 07 August 1995
7 Aug 1995
FD
Children
Justices were to explain their findings of fact behind finding that the section 31 threshold had been reached.
Children Act 1989 31
Re S (Minors)(Care Order: Appeal); Dyfed County Council v S, Re S (Discharge of Care Order); CA 6-Sep-1995 - Gazette, 06 September 1995; [1995] 2 FLR 639
Re A (Minors) Ind Summary, 16 October 1995
16 Oct 1995
FD
Children
Residence with service family abroad is in that country not at home.
Hague Convention 1980
Regina v Cambridge and Huntingdonshire Health Authority Ex Parte B (No 2); CA 27-Oct-1995 - Times, 27 October 1995
In Re G (A Minor) (Social Worker: Disclosure); CA 14-Nov-1995 - Times, 14 November 1995; Gazette, 06 December 1995; Independent, 08 December 1995; [1996] 1 WLR 1407; [1996] 1 FLR 276
Note: Disclosure In Children Cases and Effects of Regina v Derby MC Gazette, 15 November 1995
15 Nov 1995
FD
Children
Note on conflict on disclosure in breach of legal privilege in children cases.
In Re P (Minors) (Representation); FD 16-Nov-1995 - Times, 16 November 1995
In Re M (Minors) (Abduction: Peremptory Return Order); CA 20-Nov-1995 - Times, 20 November 1995; [1996] 1 FLR 478
In Re B (Minors) (Change of Surname) Times, 01 December 1995; [1996] 1 FLR 791
1 Dec 1995
CA
Stuart-Smith LJ and Wilson J
Children
The mother sought to change the surname of the three children of the family from that of her divorced husband to that of the husband whom she had subsequently married. Her application for leave was refused by the circuit judge. She appealed. Held: The appeal failed. A change of children's surname was refused despite clear wishes of teenage children.
Children Act 1989 8
1 Citers
In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof); HL 14-Dec-1995 - Independent, 17 January 1996; [1996] AC 563; [1996] 1 FLR 80; [1995] UKHL 16; [1996] Fam Law 74; [1996] 1 FCR 509; [1996] 2 WLR 8; [1996] 1 All ER 1
In Re M (Minors) (Child Abuse: Threshhold Conditions) Times, 15 December 1995
15 Dec 1995
HL
Children
A care order should be made only when the risk of harm to a child was proved by actual facts and not just by suspicion.
Children Act 1989 31
