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: 2002 To: 2002

This page lists 165 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.

 
Mrs U v Centre for Reproductive Medicine [2002] EWCA Civ 565
2002
CA
Hale LJ
Health, Children
The 1990 Act lays great emphasis upon consent. Scientific techniques developed since the first IVF baby open up the possibility of creating human life in quite new ways bringing huge practical and ethical difficulties. These have to be balanced against the strength and depth of the feelings of people who desperately long for the children which only these techniques can give them, as well as the natural desire of clinicians and scientists to use their skills to fulfil those wishes. Parliament has devised a legislative scheme and a statutory authority for regulating assisted reproduction in a way which tries to strike a fair balance between the various interests and concerns. Centres, the HFEA and the courts have to respect that scheme, however great their sympathy for the plight of particular individuals caught up in it.
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 In Re B; CA 2002 - [2000] 1 All ER 665
 
In re R (Care: disclosure: nature of proceedings) [2002] 1 FLR 755; [2001] EWHC Fam 8; [2002] Fam Law 253
2002
FD
Charles J
Children, Information
In care proceedings, unproved allegations of harm were abandoned, before being rejected by the court. The threshold criteria were satisfied on a different ground, namely, neglect and emotional harm. Held: As matters stood the local authority and the court should assess risk on the basis that the allegations of sexual abuse were just that and nothing more. Part of the background, and relevant as such, was that the allegations had been made. Also part of the background, and likewise relevant, was the fact that the allegations had not been proved and, as matters stood, would not be proved. It would be wrong for the local authority to deal with the family on the basis that it believed the children had been sexually abused. That overall approach accorded with the current reality.
Charles J said: "general statements that one sees in textbooks and hears that social work records are covered by public interest immunity, which is a widely stated class claim, should now be consigned to history."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Re B (Non-accidental injury: compelling medical evidence) [2002] EWCA Civ 902; [2002] 2 FLR 599
2002
CA
Thorpe, Rix and Arden LJJ
Children
A child had died. Care proceedings were begun for the elder child. It was not clear just who had been responsible for the death. Held: There were two questions. First, who perpetrated the injuries recorded by the experts? The answer to that can only be, 'either the mother or KR'. The court is unable to determine to the requisite standard which. Secondly, who failed to protect K from these injuries? There was no doubt that the mother failed to protect her child. KR is not involved in any way in the disposal proceedings which will follow. He is the more probable perpetrator in relation to most of these injuries. But the important factor that the judge must bring into the foundation for the disposal hearing is that he cannot disregard the risk that the mother presents as a primary carer for either Y or a future child. The judge when he comes to the disposal hearing will have to consider the attraction of rehabilitation against the question mark which attaches to the mother, at least during that period when she was in cohabitation with KR.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Re C (A child) [2002] 1 FLR 545
2002
CA

Children, Human Rights
A family residential assessment was considered. A residential hospital assessment was recommended, but the authority proposed a less expensive local assessment. The parents sought an order under section 38(6) for the recommended assessment. The judge thought the recommended option preferable, but ordered the local assessment out of considerations of cost. Held: The parents' appeal was allowed. Cost was only one factor, though an important one. A local authority making a proposal based on cost must provide cogent evidence, and might include consideration of the alternatives, including shared funding. The family's human rights had been engaged, and the judge had been wrong to go ahead on untested written evidence.
Children Act 1989 38(6)

 
Re B (a Minor) [2002] 1 FLR 545
2002
CA

Children, Human Rights
Six of the seven children were already in care, and an application was to be made for the seventh. The guardian proposed a residential assessment of mother and baby. The authority sought separate assessments, with an immediate interim order, and the child placed with foster parents. The mother appealed. Held: Her appeal was allowed. The court had not properly balanced the advantages of assessing the mother and baby together. The purpose of a s38 order was to provide the court with the information it would need to make a final order. The judge had jurisdiction to make an order though the interim order had been made. The proposed assessment satisfied the test that it would provide the court with the information it would need to make the final order.
Children Act 1989 838(6)

 
B County Council v L and Others [2002] EWHC 2327 Fam
2002
FD
Charles J
Children
Whilst under assessment before consideration of a final order, the mother said she had hurt her older child. The hospital was unable to provide 24 hour supervision, and the assessment was terminated. The parents sought an order for an assessment at an alternative hospital. Held: If the assessment was necessary, it was not correct to stop the assessment for financial reasons. The assessment must be concluded.
Children Act 1989 38(6)
1 Citers


 
B v H (Habitual Residence: Wardship) [2002] 1 FLR 388
2002
FD
Charles J
Children
A mother of three children, who was pregnant with her fourth child, accompanied the father on a visit to Bangladesh. After their arrival the father announced his intention to remain there and refused to hand over the passports of the mother and children. As a result the fourth child was born in Bangladesh. The mother applied for his return to the UK Held: Although the youngest child had been born in Bangladesh, she was habitually resident in the United Kingdom, because it was the habitual residence of her parents. The father's unilateral decision not to return to the United Kingdom had not altered that fact.
To erect a positive rule that physical presence was a necessary prerequisite to establishing an habitual residence ran "counter to the proposition . . . that habitual residence is, or is primarily, an issue of fact and is not an artificial concept".
1 Citers


 
Re H [2002] 3 FCR 277
2002
CA
Thorpe LJ
Children
Thorpe LJ said: "in weighing the rival claims of the biological parent over the psychological parent, the court must arrive at its choice on the application of the welfare test, the paramountcy test contained in s 1, having particular regard to the welfare checklist contained in s 1(3)"
Children Act 1989 1
1 Citers


 
P, C and S v United Kingdom [2002] 2 FLR 631; (2002) 35 EHRR 31
2002
ECHR

Human Rights, Children
The local authority had obtained the issue of an Emergency Protection Order under the 1989 Act to remove a child at birth. Held: Where the possibility of harm arose from the mother introducing something into the child's system (such as a laxative) that did not justify separating mother and child.
Children Act 1989
1 Citers


 
Re O and N (Care: preliminary hearing) [2002] 2 FLR 1167; [2002] EWCA Civ 1271
2002
CA
Ward LJ and Sir Martin Nourse
Children
Care proceedings were commenced for one child after the death of a sibling, but without evidence as to which carer was responsible. Held: It had not been established upon a balance of probabilities that any one or more of the injuries were caused by either the mother or father. The mother must be treated as if she did not cause L to suffer significant harm within the meaning of s 31(2) of the Act. Moreover she is to be treated as if she has not caused L to suffer any physical harm or caused L or C to be at risk of suffering physical harm from her within the meaning of s 1(3)(e) of the Act.
Children Act 1989 31(2)
1 Citers


 
In re B [2002] 2 FLR 1133
2002
CA
Thorpe LJ
Children

Children Act 1989 31
1 Citers


 
Re A (Children) (Shared Residence) [2002] 1 FCR 177
2002
CA
Hale LJ
Children
There were three children, a boy and two girls. The girls lived with their mother and the boy lived with his father. The boy was unwilling to see his mother, and was not doing so. The father appealed a shared residence order in her favour. Held: Hale LJ said: "the law is that the parents already have shared parental responsibility for their children. They have equal and independent power to exercise that parental responsibility. A residence order is about where a child is to live. It is very difficult to make such an order about a child who is not only not living with one of the parents but is, for the foreseeable future, unlikely even to visit with that parent. Notwithstanding, therefore, that that parent does not wish there to be any distinction between the children, because she does not wish M to feel rejected by her, the court's order has to be designed to reflect the real position on the ground."
1 Citers


 
Re: L (Contact: Genuine Fear) [2002] 1 FLR 621
2002
FD
Bruce Blair QC
Children
The Court had to consider a mother’s total opposition to any contact between a child and his father. It was compelled to reach a decision with reluctance that the mother’s phobic disorder, not based on rational thinking, nevertheless was of such genuineness and intensity that to order contact would cause the child marked emotional harm. He would be exposed to the emotional effect on the mother which would be profound and possibly de-stabilising.
1 Citers



 
 Re L (Care: Assessment: Fair Trial); FD 2002 - [2002] 2 FLR 730; [2002] EWHC 1379 (Fam)
 
In re L (Care: Assessment: Fair Trial) [2002] 2 FLR 730
2002
FD
Munby J
Children, Human Rights
The court set out precepts to be followed by courts in preparing for care proceedings so as to ensure that they did not infringe the rights of the family to respect for their family life under article 8.
Munby J said: ' . . it must never be forgotten that, with the state's abandonment of the right to impose capital sentences, orders of the kind which judges of this Division are typically invited to make in public law proceedings are amongst the most drastic that any judge in any jurisdiction is ever empowered to make. It is a terrible thing to say to any parent - particularly, perhaps, to a mother - that he or she is to lose their child for ever.'
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers


 
In re B (Interim care order: Directions) Times, 29 January 2002; Gazette, 06 March 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 25; [2002] 1 FLR 545
14 Jan 2002
CA
Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Buxton
Children
The local authority applied for an interim care order immediately the child, B, was born. A proposal was made for the mother and child to move from the maternity hospital to a residential placement a mother and baby home which provided help in improving parents' child care skills. The local authority was not prepared to agree to this placement and the judge did not give a section 38(6) direction. Held: The section under the 1989 Act was designed to allow the court to obtain such information as it thought proper to help it make a decision on an application for a care order. The section gave the court a wide discretion. The court had the power to make the order requested, and that was the appropriate order. As to the proposed programme at Beacon Lodge (Thorpe LJ):- "… one objective is to prepare women residents for independent motherhood by a process of advice, instruction and education. The assessment is ongoing and subject to continual review. Throughout assessment the mother will be made aware of areas of concern through regular key worker sessions in addition to normal contact with staff. The assessment focuses on the parents' ability to learn and develop adequate skills and, where appropriate, independent living skills would be taught. Whilst the main focus of the work is the child, it is recognised that it is frequently the needs of the mother which must be addressed in order to meet the needs of the child." Buxton LJ said the court was given "a very broad and generous power of determination in deciding what is appropriate and what is not appropriate in respect of the assessment of the child in the interim period."
Children Act 1989 38(6)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
N, Re Requirement To Dispense With Parental Consent [2002] NIFam 2
16 Jan 2002
FdNI

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
A, Re Abduction [2002] NIFam 3
17 Jan 2002
FdNI

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re I (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 26
17 Jan 2002
CA

Children
mother's application for permission to appeal an order granting permission to the father to remove their son, T, permanently from the jurisdiction to live in Spain.
[ Bailii ]

 
 A (a Patient) v A Health Authority and Others; In re J (a Child); Regina (S) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another; CA 24-Jan-2002 - Times, 11 March 2002; Gazette, 14 March 2002
 
Re H (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 190
29 Jan 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re J (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 189
29 Jan 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re H (Child's name: First name) Times, 06 February 2002; Gazette, 14 March 2002
29 Jan 2002
CA
Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Buxton
Children
The parents were married, but separated after the wife became pregnant. Both the father and mother registered the birth, but under different first names. The father was first, and the mother's registration was cancelled. None of the authorities about surname disputes applied to a child's first name. The surname by which a child was registered and known was of particular significance, but it is commonplace for given names to vary, as by baptism. Held: The mother should be allowed to use her chosen names for her daughter for certain external purposes, but she must recognise that the child had an immutable series of names by statutory registration. The judges order restraining her was overturned.
Children Act 1989 8

 
Re S (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 191
30 Jan 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re M (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 192
30 Jan 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re M (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 155
30 Jan 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
B (A Child), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 193
31 Jan 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re S (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 179
1 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re W (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 237
2 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (D) v Camberwell Green Youth Court; Regina (N) v Same etc Times, 13 February 2003; [2003] EWHC 227 (Admin)
4 Feb 2002
Admn

Evidence, Human Rights, Children, Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Evidence
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.
European Convention on Human Rights 6 - Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Re S (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 168
6 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re E (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 167
6 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]

 
 Re W (A Child); CA 7-Feb-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 200
 
Re F (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 252
11 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re A (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 245
12 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re H (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 299
13 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re S B W C and K (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 246
19 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re Y (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 377
20 Feb 2002
CA
Ward LJ
Children
Application by father for leave to appeal against order made in child contact case. The judge had when making a contact order rescinded all earlier orders. The father now said he needed clarification that orders not related to contact had not been rescinded also. Held: The position was clarified. Leave refused.
[ Bailii ]
 
B and D v R [2002] 2 FLR 843
22 Feb 2002
FD
Hedley J
Children
The parties were unmarried but entered into IVF treatment. They separated, but the mother continued with treatment not telling the IVF center of the breakdown of the first relationship nor of her new relationship until after the successful insemination. The father sought a declaration of paternity. Held: The court had jurisdiction under the Act: "that treatment services were originally provided to the parties together. No one in this case really sought strenuously to argue to the contrary." The court emphasised the need for clarity and certainty on an issue which might attain practical importance only after the lapse of many years. If a male partner changed his mind about treatment services he could withdraw his acknowledgment, and a clinic, if informed of a change of circumstances, should reconsider the position. But in the absence of the partner expressly withdrawing his acknowledgment or a review by the clinic: "then in my judgment the original course of treatment continues as treatment services provided to both of them together and, if a child is conceived in the course of that, the man will be the father. This approach affords clarity, simplicity and certainty."
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 28(3)
1 Citers


 
Re A (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 269
25 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re W (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 278
27 Feb 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (on the Application of J) v London Borough of Enfield and Another Times, 18 April 2002; [2002] EWHC 432 (Admin); [2002] 5 CCLR 434; [2002] 2 FLR 1
4 Mar 2002
Admn
Justice Elias
Housing, Local Government, Children, Benefits, Human Rights
The mother and child were destitute, and sought to oblige the local authority to provide accommodation and support. Held: The duty to a child under the section could not be extended to include a duty to accommodate and support the child and his or her mother. Section 2 of the 2000 Act might be of assistance, being drafted in broad terms to provide new powers for local authorities, including the power to assist in these circumstances. A local authority had power under the 2000 Act to provide an immigrant from Ghana whose status had not yet been determined with financial assistance for acquiring accommodation if this was the only way to avoid a breach of the applicant's Article 8 rights. The facts of that case were that, if the immigrant was not assisted to acquire accommodation, it would be necessary to take her child into care. It was common ground that this would violate her Article 8(1) rights. Where a Convention right would be infringed if a local authority concluded that it was not open to it to exercise a particular power which it had, but that the infringement could be avoided by exercising some other power which it had, the power to exercise that other power becomes a duty to exercise it.
Children Act 1989 17 - Local Government Act 2000 2 - European Convention on Human Rights A8
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
D (A Child), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 340
8 Mar 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re A-S (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 380
11 Mar 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]

 
 In re M and M C (Children); CA 12-Mar-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 499; [2002] 2 FLR 377; [2003] 1 FLR 461

 
 In re S (Minors) (Care Order: Implementation of Care Plan); HL 14-Mar-2002 - [2002] UKHL 10; [2002] 2 AC 291; [2002] 2 All ER 192; [2002] UKHRR 652; [2002] BLGR 251; [2002] HRLR 26; [2002] 1 FLR 815; [2002] 2 WLR 720; [2002] Fam Law 413; [2002] 1 FCR 577

 
 Re S (Children: Care Plan); In re W and B (Children: Care plan) In re W (Child: Care plan); HL 14-Mar-2002 - Times, 15 March 2002; Gazette, 25 April 2002; [2002] 2 AC 291; [2002] UKHL 10
 
In re H and A (Children) (Paternity: Blood Tests) [2002] EWCA Civ 383; [2002] 1 FLR 1145; [2002] 2 FCR 469
21 Mar 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ, Butler-Sloss DBE LJ P, Key LJ
Children
The right to know one's parentage and identity is a fundamental part of private life. Thorpe LJ said: "first, that the interests of justice are best served by the ascertainment of the truth and secondly, that the court should be furnished with the best available science and not confined to such unsatisfactory alternatives as presumptions and inferences. It seems to me obvious that all that Lord Hodson expressed in the passage [above] . . applies with even greater force and logic in a later era. First, there have been huge scientific advances with the arrival of DNA testing. Scientists no longer require blood, thus removing what for some is the unbearable process of its extraction. Of even greater importance is the abandonment of the legal concept of legitimacy achieved by the Family Law Reform Act 1987."
Family Law Reform Act 1987
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Re S; S v S [2002] EWHC 540 (Fam); [2002] 1 FLR 1156; [2002] Fam Law 499
22 Mar 2002
FD
Tyrer HHJ
Children
Father sought contract to his three children
[ Bailii ]
 
D (A Child), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 448
22 Mar 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re C (a Child) (Care proceedings: Care plan); Regina (C) v Waltham Forest London Borough Council Times, 18 April 2002
28 Mar 2002
Admn
Justice Wilson
Children, Judicial Review, Adoption
An application was made to put a child in care. The local authority created a care plan involving placing the child for adoption with a Jewish family. The mother wanted to have the child placed with long term foster parents, with some continuing contact. The guardian also had reservations about the scheme, because of the different religious background of the proposed adopters. An application for judicial review of the authority's plan was presented. Held: The correct procedure to challenge the care plan, was to make application within the care proceedings. The application for judicial review had added a six month delay. The proposed plan would be approved. The proposed adopters were committed to the child being brought up respectful of her origins.
Local Authority Social Services Act 1970

 
In re T (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 535
11 Apr 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ
Children
Father's application for leave to appeal - contact.
[ Bailii ]
 
H (A Child), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 542
15 Apr 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Bowden and Another v Lancashire County Council [2002] EWCA Civ 569
16 Apr 2002
CA
Peter Gibson LJ, May LJ
Children, Negligence
The claimant had succeeded in her appeal against the cancellation of her registration as a child minder, and now sought damages for negligence in using unnecessarily the emergency procedure leading to damage to the claimant's reputation and business.
Children Act 1989
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
P (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Barking Youth Court [2002] EWHC 734 (Admin); [2002] MHLR 304; [2002] 2 Cr App R 19; [2002] Crim LR 657; (2002) 166 JP 641
17 Apr 2002
Admn
Wright J
Criminal Practice, Children
Application for judicial review of decision that a child, P, was fit to stand trial on accusations of offences under the 1971 and 1997 Acts.
Protection from Harassment Act 1997 - Criminal Damage Act 1971 - Youth Courts (Constitution) Rules1954
[ Bailii ]
 
O (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 1011
19 Apr 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
B (A Child), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 707
22 Apr 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]

 
 In re S (Children) (Child abduction: Asylum appeal); FD 24-Apr-2002 - Times, 09 May 2002; Gazette, 30 May 2002
 
In re B (A Child) (Non-accidental Injury) [2002] EWCA Civ 752; [2002] 2 FLR 1133; [2002] Fam Law 879; [2002] 3 FCR 85
24 Apr 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ, Buxton LJ, Jackson J
Children
Even where all the experts conclude that non-accidental injury is not the only possible cause of injury to a child, the court may conclude looking at the evidence on the whole that that is the cause.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Leicestershire County Council v W and P [2002] EWCA Civ 710
30 Apr 2002
CA

Children
Difficulties where there was conflicting evidence as to physical abuse in a child care case.
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (W) v Lambeth London Borough Council Times, 23 May 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 613
3 May 2002
CA
Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Laws and Lord Justice Keene
Children, Local Government, Housing
A family had been found to be voluntarily homeless. The family asked the authority to provide housing to the family under the 1989 Act from its duty to care for the children. Held: The 1989 Act did not change the law in the 1980 Act. The authority had a power to assist and Another child in these circumstances. However, it was not a duty, and the authority had a discretion as to how it might use the power. The 2001 Lambeth case was wrongly decided. The powers of the authority were not to be compartmentalized.
Children Act 1989 17 - Child Care Act 1980 1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
W (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 715
8 May 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re T (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 732
9 May 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ
Children
Application for leave to appeal against contact order.
[ Bailii ]
 
In re P (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 846
16 May 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Wells v Pickering Times, 04 June 2002; Gazette, 27 June 2002
17 May 2002
ChD
Mr David Oliver, QC
Land, Children, Litigation Practice
The rules required a court, looking to enforce a charging order, to look to any other competing proprietary interests. The claimant suggested that this should include the welfare interests of any child occupying the property as his or her home. Held: The welfare interests were not proprietary interests. The rules made no specific provision for such interests and the normal rules applied.
Rules of the Supreme Court Order 88, rule 5A(2)(f)

 
In re K [2002] NIFam 13
17 May 2002
FdNI

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re G (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 761
20 May 2002
CA
Ward LJ, Sir Martin Nourse
Children

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
J for an Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act
23 May 2002
SCS
Lady Paton
Scotland, Children

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
[ ScotC ]
 
Re G (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1012
27 May 2002
CA

Children, Adoption

[ Bailii ]
 
In re S (Children) (Child abduction: Asylum appeal) Times, 03 June 2002; Gazette, 04 July 2002
28 May 2002
CA
Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Laws and Lord Justice Rix
Immigration, Children
The appellant was the mother of a child, who was claiming asylum. The father sought the return of the child to India, claiming he had been abducted by the mother. She said that whilst her claim for asylum was extant, the court must not allow her or the child to be removed. Held: India was not a signatory to the convention, and therefore the matter had to be dealt with under the court's wardship jurisdiction. The mother and children had now been granted exceptional leave to stay in the UK. The words "remove" or "required to leave" in the 1999 Act, were to be read as technical immigration law terms, with no wider implications. The proper forum for the father's claim was India, and the child must be returned.
Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 - Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 15
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Re B (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 902
29 May 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re X (Children) Unreported, 31 May 2002
30 May 2002
CA
President, Buxton LJ, Hale LJ
Children, Adoption
Foster carers of children wanted to adopt them without the parents knowing their identity, using the confidential serial number approach. The parents had been led to believe that the children had been placed with a different family for adoption and wanted to continue to have contact with the children. The irony was that their preference had been for the children to stay with the original foster family. The judge decided that the parents should not be told the adopters' identity. The Court of Appeal considered the difficulties which this would give their representatives, who were aware of the true position and decided that the judge could not be said to be plainly wrong. Passing criticism was made of the local authority in not seeking orders giving them permission to refuse contact and free the children for adoption and for deceiving the parents in the first place. The Court of Appeal could only hope that some compromise could be reached by the time the adoption application came on for hearing.

 
Re B (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 881
13 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re T (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 882
13 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
B (A Child), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 1338
17 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re C (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1014
17 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re V (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1016
17 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re S (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1017
19 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re I (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 890
20 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re G (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1022
20 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re I (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1043
25 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re M (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1044
26 Jun 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ
Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re R (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1046
26 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re S (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1144
27 Jun 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re C (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1049
28 Jun 2002
CA

Children
Parents' appeal from care order.
[ Bailii ]
 
Re J, Threshold Criteria [2002] NIFam 17
28 Jun 2002
FdNI

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re L, (Care: Assessment: Fair Trial) [2002] EWHC 1379 (Fam)
1 Jul 2002
FD
Munby J
Children
Care proceedings - death of previous sibling
[ Bailii ]

 
 In re M (Child: Residence); CA 2-Jul-2002 - Times, 24 July 2002
 
Re H (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1025
3 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re S (Child) (Abduction: Custody rights) Times, 15 July 2002; Gazette, 12 September 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 908; [2002] Fam Law 733; [2002] 3 FCR 43; [2002] 1 WLR 3355
3 Jul 2002
CA
Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Sedley and Lord Justice Dyson
Children
The mother accepted that she had abducted her child from Israel, but sought to establish a defence under the convention that the security conditions in Israel were such as to justify the removal. Held: The Convention requirements were restrictive, and were not satisfied in this case. The test of whether there was a grave risk that the minor's return would expose her to physical and psychological harm and otherwise place her in an intolerable situation, required a twofold test. First to look at the actual risks faced, and then to take a broader view. The section was correctly to be interpreted narrowly. The risk of terrorist attack was not so high that she would not have been able to take minimal steps to reduce that risk.
Ward LJ said: "Although it is possible to appeal against a finding of fact, it is notoriously difficult to succeed in so doing. Where findings of fact are made based on the demeanour of a witness, the appeal court will seldom interfere because the trial judge has the special advantage over the appellate judge."
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 13(b)
[ Bailii ]
 
Re C (Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1026
4 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re J-S (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1028
5 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
P, C And S v The United Kingdom Times, 16 August 2002; 56547/00; [2002] ECHR 599; 56547/00; (2002) 35 EHRR 1075; [2002] ECHR 604
16 Jul 2002
ECHR
Costa, Baka, Bratza, Jorundsson, Loucaides, Birsan and Ugrekhelidze, Early
Human Rights, Children, Family
The applicants challenged the way in which their newborn children had been removed by the state after birth. S had not had the opportunity of legal representation, after her lawyers had withdrawn. The removal of S's child was challenged as disproportionate and a breach of the right to family life. Held: Given the importance of the decision, the denial of legal representation infringed the family's legal rights. Representation was necessary, and the refusal to allow an adjournment denied a fair trial. The procedure under which a decision was made before the birth of a child to remove it at birth, leading to a probable adoption was draconian and not justified given the alternative possibilities, and was an interference with the right to family life.
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
C and Another v Bury Metropolitan Borough Council Times, 25 July 2002
18 Jul 2002
FD
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss
Children, Human Rights
Where a children case involving a challenge to a care plan or the placement of children in care would raise issues under the Human Rights legislation, the case should normally be heard before a High Court judge of the Family Division. If possible it should be listed before a judge with experience also of administrative law. Such cases now involved a broader and more investigative approach than hitherto. The courts have a wide discretion when looking at such matters which also placed greater responsibility on a court.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Cites


 
In re S ( A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 978
19 Jul 2002
CA
Wall J
Children
Application by F for permission to appeal against findings of fact made in care proceedings.
[ Bailii ]
 
Re B (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1225
19 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re C (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1226
19 Jul 2002
CA

Children, Human Rights

[ Bailii ]
 
Re T (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1204; [2003] 1 FCR 334
23 Jul 2002
CA

Children
Contact dispute
[ Bailii ]
 
Re B (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1307
24 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re S (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1309
24 Jul 2002
CA

Children
Whether shared or sole residence order.
[ Bailii ]
 
Re M (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1160
25 Jul 2002
CA

Children
Application by the maternal grandfather of a little girl called E for permission to appeal against the order refusing his application for contact.
[ Bailii ]
 
Re A (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1343; [2003] 3 FCR 656
26 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
O and N (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1271; [2002] 3 FCR 418; [2002] 2 FLR 1181
26 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
El Ali v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Daraz v Same, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, intervening Times, 12 August 2002; Gazette, 10 October 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1103
26 Jul 2002
CA
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice May and Lord Justice Laws
Immigration, Children
The applicants contended that as children of Palestinian Arabs who were entitled to be treated as asylum applicants, they were to be treated on the same basis. The Immigration Appeal Tribunal had decided that they had to establish such entitlement themselves. Held: The entitlement was not 'inherited' but had to be established for the children in their own right. This opinion contradicted that of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, but had been reached after careful consideration, and was correct.
United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 (Cmd 9171) 1D
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (Rose and Another) v Secretary of State for Health and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Times, 22 August 2002; Gazette, 10 October 2002; [2002] EWHC 1593 (Admin)
26 Jul 2002
Admn
Mr Justice Scott Baker
Children, Human Rights, Administrative, Health
Applications were made, challenging the refusal of the Secretary of State for Health, and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, to institute a system where a child born by artificial insemination could make enquiries as to his or her parenthood. Held: The knowledge of facts about one's biological parenthood was part of the right to family or private life. Accordingly the decisions made did engage the children's Human Rights, and the appropriate tests should be applied to that decision making process.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Re A (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1313
29 Jul 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re B (A child) (Care proceedings: Diplomatic Immunity) Times, 14 October 2002; Gazette, 24 October 2002
30 Jul 2002
FD
Butler-Sloss President
Children, International
An order was sought in care proceedings with regard to a child of a family where the father was a member of the administrative and diplomatic staff of a diplomatic mission. Held: Where a child was present in the UK at the time of the application, an English court had jurisdiction. Such a worker was protected only to the extent that his acts formed part of his duties. An exception to the Vienna Convention (37(2)) which underpinned the 1964 Act allowed the court to make an order even if the child was within a protected residence. Article 30 protected the premises of the diplomatic agent, not to the consequences of his acts.
Diplomatic Privileges Act 1964 4 - Children Act 1989 31


 
 Lillie and Reed v Newcastle City Council, Barker, Jones, Saradjian, Wardell; QBD 30-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWHC 1600 (QB)

 
 Re O (Children); CA 31-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 1347

 
 Re M (Disclosure: Children and Family Reporter); CA 31-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 1199; [2002] 3 FCR 208; (2002) 99(39) LSG 37; [2002] 2 FLR 893; [2003] Fam Law 96; [2003] Fam 26; [2002] 3 WLR 1669; [2002] 4 All ER 401

 
 In re M (a Child) (Disclosure: Children and Family Reporter); CA 31-Jul-2002 - Times, 23 August 2002; Gazette, 10 October 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1199; [2003] Fam 26

 
 Re J (A Child); CA 31-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 1346

 
 Re D (A Child); CA 31-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 1348

 
 Re C (Children); CA 31-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWCA Civ 1345
 
W (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 1411
22 Aug 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re L (A child) (Abduction: Jurisdiction) Times, 14 October 2002; Gazette, 17 October 2002
9 Sep 2002
FD
Ward J
Children
The mother had brought the child from France to England. That removal was wrongful. The father, having begun proceedings in France, sought his return. Held: The father had not co-operated readily with the UK courts in bringing his application, causing excess delay. The return of the child was discretionary. In this case the child was old enough to be listened to, and to have regard to his views. There was nothing in the Brussels II to give it priority over the defences in the 1980 Hague convention, and the court could hear the application.
Council Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 on Jurisdiction and th Recognition of Judgments in Matrimonial Matters etc - 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction

 
Re K (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1361
10 Sep 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re T (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1317
11 Sep 2002
CA
Thorpe, Potter, Kay LJJ
Children
Application for leave to appeal in care proceedings.
[ Bailii ]
 
Baumbast and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department Times, 08 October 2002; [2002] EUECJ C-413/99; [2002] ECR 1-7091
17 Sep 2002
ECJ
Rodriguez Iglesia, Jann, Macken, Colneric, von Bahr, Gulmann, Edward, La Pergola, Puissochet, Wathelet, Skouris
Immigration, Children
The first applicant, his wife and her children had been granted leave to stay in the UK. At the time the leave was withdrawn the children were settled in schools, and were granted indefinite leave. The second applicant was the mother of children who also acquired leave. They each appealed refusal of leave to stay. Held: The children had acquired the rights as the children of migrant workers within the EEC under the Regulation. That regulation was to be interpreted so as to provide also for the right of residence of the child's primary carer.
"A citizen of the European Union who no longer enjoys a right of residence as a migrant worker in the host Member State can, as a citizen of the Union, enjoy there a right of residence by direct application of Article 18(1) EC. The exercise of that right is subject to the limitations and conditions referred to in that provision, but the competent authorities and, where necessary, the national courts must ensure that those limitations and conditions are applied in compliance with the general principles of Community Law and, in particular, the principle of proportionality."
"A citizen of the European Union who no longer enjoys a right of residence as a migrant worker in the host Member State can, as a citizen of the Union, enjoy there a right of residence by direct application of Article 18(1) EC. The exercise of that right is subject to the limitations and conditions referred to in that provision, but the competent authorities and, where necessary, the national courts must ensure that those limitations and conditions are applied in compliance with the general principles of Community Law and, in particular, the principle of proportionality."
Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 12
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In re W (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1618
24 Sep 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re K (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1424
4 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re H (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1625
4 Oct 2002
CA
Bodey J
Children
Grandmother's appeal from refusal of contact
[ Bailii ]
 
In re P (a Child) (Parental dispute: Judicial determination) Times, 05 November 2002
7 Oct 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ, Bodey J
Children
The parents had disputed which school the child should attend. They applied to the court, and the court said that the mother should decide. Held: The parties having asked the question, they were entitled to receive an answer. The judge's answer was unprincipled. The court should try to direct the parties so as to avoid discord where possible, but the court should still give its own view, never departing from the need to put the child's welfare first. In this case, the mother's appeal succeeded.

 
In re R (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1465
7 Oct 2002
CA
Justice Bodey
Children, Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
In re W (Children) (Care Proceedings: Witness anonymity) Times, 01 November 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1626; [2003] 1 FLR 329
7 Oct 2002
CA
Thorpe, LJ Body J
Children
In care proceedings, the court had allowed a social worker to give evidence in such a way that her identity was hidden. She was in fear of violence. Held: It was possible for a civil court to provide anonymity. These public law proceedings could look for a parallel in criminal cases in the Taylor case. However this must be exceptional. The danger was real, but this is sadly a necessary part of every social worker's professional life, as it was for others. The consequences to the parents were just as dire as would be a criminal conviction. Social workers must see this as a professional hazard, and the judge had been wrong to accede to the request.
R v Taylor (Gary) (Times Aug 17, 1994)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In re A (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1662
9 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re M (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1484
10 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re D (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1483
10 Oct 2002
CA
Hale LJ
Children
Application for leave to appeal from refusal to revoke care order.
[ Bailii ]
 
In re S (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1613
11 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re B (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1508
11 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
J, Re Care Order [2002] NIFam 26
14 Oct 2002
FdNI

Northern Ireland, Children

[ Bailii ]
 
MM v AMR Or M for an Order Under the Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
14 Oct 2002
OHCS
Lord Macfadyen
Scotland, Children

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
[ ScotC ]
 
In re G (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1547
15 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Re W-K (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1553
16 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re A (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1718
22 Oct 2002
CA
Ward LJ
Children
The father sought permission to appeal against an order granting him only defined contact with his children.
[ Bailii ]
 
In re J (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1717
22 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re T (A Child: contact) [2002] EWCA Civ 1736; [2003] 1 FLR 531; [2003] 1 FCR 303
24 Oct 2002
CA
Thorpe, Rix, Arden LJJ
Children, Litigation Practice
The court considered an appeal in care proceedings, where it was felt that the judge's reasons for his findings were inadequately set out. Arden LJ pointed out that the principles in Emery Reimbold applied also in care proceedings, and set out counsel's duties on receiving what might be a deficient draft judgment: "In a complex case, it might well be prudent, and certainly not out of place, for the judge, having handed down or delivered judgment, to ask the advocates whether there are any matters which he has not covered. Even if he does not, as a matter of courtesy at least, to draw the judge's attention to any material omission of which he is then aware or then believes exists. It is well-established that it is open to a judge to amend his judgment, if he thinks fit, at any time up to the drawing of the order. In many cases, the advocate ought to raise the matter with the judge in pursuance of his duty to assist the court to achieve the overriding objective (CPR 1.3, which does not as such apply to these proceedings); and in some cases, it may follow from the advocate's duty not to mislead the court that he should raise the matter rather than allow the order to be drawn. It would be unsatisfactory to use an omission by a judge to deal with a point in a judgment as grounds for an application for appeal if the matter has not been brought to the judge's attention when there was a ready opportunity so to do. Unnecessary costs and delay may result. I should make it clear that there are general observations for assistance in future cases, and that I make no criticisms of counsel in this case".
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal) Times, 30 October 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1736; [2003] 1 FLR 531
24 Oct 2002
CA
Thorpe, Rix, Arden LLJ
Children, Civil Procedure Rules
After a judgment the parties sought to appeal. Held: The judge had failed to make a finding on a critical issue in the case, namely whether or not the mother of the child concerned had "even if prompted only at a subconscious level, nevertheless deliberately engaged in alienation." Whilst some circumstances might require an application for leave to appeal direct to the Court of Appeal, the parties should normally always first apply for leave to the judge whose decision was to be appealed. Where possible the question of appeal should be addressed in advance, so as to allow the judge when giving his opinion to give appropriately detailed reasons. When judgment was given, an advocate ought immediately to draw the judge’s attention to any material omission of which he was aware.
The court discussed the need to re-examine the failure to enforce contact orders: "I reject [counsel's] dismissive submission that the Strasbourg cases add nothing to the domestic jurisprudence. Those cases as they stand suggest that the methods and levels of investigation that our courts have conventionally adopted when trying out issues of alienation may not meet the standards that Arts 6 and 8 . . require. There are policy issues here that the Government and the judiciary may need to consider collaboratively."
Civil Procedure Rules Part 52
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
In re R (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1596
25 Oct 2002
CA

Children
Application for leave to appeal from freeing for adoption order.
[ Bailii ]
 
In re B (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1666
25 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re A (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1595
25 Oct 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re G (A Child) (Custody Rights: Unmarried Father) Gazette, 12 December 2002
28 Oct 2002
FD
Munby J
Children
The parents were unmarried, living together in England. After the separation, the mother returned to Ireland with the child without informing the father who had continued direct involvement in the child's care. He now sought an order under the Convention. Held: In the absence of a parental responsibility order an unmarried father could not acquire sufficient standing to apply under the convention, despite his involvement in the care. Each case however is to be decided on its own facts.
Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 15

 
H (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 1692
4 Nov 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Yousef v The Netherlands [2003] 1 FLR 210; 33711/96; [2002] ECHR 710; (2003) 36 EHRR 20; [2002] ECHR 716
5 Nov 2002
ECHR

Human Rights, Children
In "judicial decisions where the rights under article 8 of parents and of a child are at stake, the child's rights must be the paramount consideration."
European Convention on Human Rights 8.1
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
In re S (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1695
5 Nov 2002
CA

Children
Father's application for permission to appeal orders in relation to his daughter J, that J should live with her mother, that there be no order about her contact with her father
[ Bailii ]
 
Re B R and C (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1825
12 Nov 2002
CA
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P
Children
Failure by fathers of children subject to proceedings not complying with orders for disclosure of medical records.
[ Bailii ]
 
Re B (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1859
13 Nov 2002
CA

Children
Protracted contact dispute
[ Bailii ]
 
MM v AMR or M [2002] ScotCS 330
14 Nov 2002
SCS

Children, International

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985
[ Bailii ]
 
Re C (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1769
25 Nov 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
E-B (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 1771
25 Nov 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
F and H (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 1770
25 Nov 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
K (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 1836
27 Nov 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re B (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1835
27 Nov 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re S (A Child: Abduction) [2003] 1 FCR 235; [2003] 1 FLR 1008; [2003] Fam Law 298; [2002] EWCA Civ 1941
27 Nov 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ, Scott Baker, Munby JJ
Children
M's appeal from refusal of order for return of a child under the Hague Convention.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
A and Others v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others Times, 11 December 2002
27 Nov 2002
FD
Sumner J
Family, Children, Media, Costs
Applications had been made by fathers for specific issue orders that their children be immunised. The respondents sought orders to allow the cases to be either heard in open court or for other reporting restrictions to be lifted. As a result of their application, the time allocated for the substantive hearings had been severely compromised, and costs were sought against them. Held: A timely application by the media should not result in a costs order, but here the applications had been late, and had considerably disrupted the hearing. Even if the application was arguable, as it was here, it was not for the media to argue that the individuals involved should themselves have taken any steps. The matter of whether reporting should be allowed and on what terms was for the court alone. An application which was late might be viewed as improper for that very reason, if disruption resulted. Here, however, a pre-trial order might have raised expectations that reporting would be allowed, and a costs order was not appropriate.


 
 Regina (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; QBD 29-Nov-2002 - Times, 05 December 2002; Gazette, 16 January 2003; Gazette, 23 January 2003; [2002] EWHC 2497 (Admin); [2003] 1 FLR 484
 
In re H (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1867
2 Dec 2002
CA

Children

[ Bailii ]
 
In re S (A Child) (Residence order: condition) (No 2) [2003] 1 FCR 138; [2002] EWCA Civ 1795
4 Dec 2002
CA
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss P, Waller, Laws LJJ
Children
Butler-Sloss LJ P referred to the exceptionality required before restricting a parents right to remove a child within the jurisdiction, saying: "the principle enunciated in Re E . . that the court ought not in other than exceptional circumstances to impose a condition on a residence order to a primary carer who is providing entirely appropriate care for the child."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
In re J (Children) [2002] EWCA Civ 1908
5 Dec 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ
Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Hoppe v Germany 28422/95; (2002) 38 EHRR 285; [2003] 1 FLR 384; [2002] ECHR 793; [2002] ECHR 799
5 Dec 2002
ECHR

Human Rights, Children
Hudoc No violation of Art. 8 ; No violation of Art. 6-1
The applicant complained that he had been denied a fair hearing in appeal proceedings concerning his right of access to his daughter contrary to article 6(1). Held: "The court recalls further that article 6(1) requires in principle that a hearing be held. The question therefore arises whether a departure from this principle could, in the circumstances of the case, be justified at the appeal stage.
The manner in which article 6 of the Convention applies to proceedings before courts of appeal depends on the special features of the domestic proceedings viewed as a whole. Even where the court of appeal has jurisdiction both over the facts and in law, article 6 does not always require a right to a public hearing, irrespective of the nature of the issues to be decided. The publicity requirement is certainly one of the means whereby confidence in the courts is maintained. However, there are other considerations, including the right to a trial within a reasonable time and the related need for an expeditious handling of the courts' case load, which must be taken into account in determining the necessity of public hearings in the proceedings subsequent to the trial at first instance level. Provided a public hearing has been held at first instance, the absence of a hearing before a second or third instance may accordingly be justified by the special features of the proceedings at issue." and
"in cases concerning a person's relationship with his or her child, there is a duty to exercise exceptional diligence in view of the risk that the passage of time may result in a de facto determination of the matter."
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
In re B (A Child) [2002] EWCA Civ 1844
9 Dec 2002
CA

Children
Contact arrangements
[ Bailii ]
 
Re H (a Child) (2002) LTL
12 Dec 2002


Children
The authority, having taken the mother three older children took an interim care order within ten days of the birth of the fourth. Both parents went into a residential assessment unit with the baby, and on progress being made, proposed rehabilitation in the community. On one occasion the mother left the unit overnight, complaining of her despair at the father's behaviour. The authority then sought the baby's removal. Intensive support was recommended by the psychiatrist, but this was unavailable locally. Held: The authority's response had been disproportionate. There had been a basic failure to provide for the mother's needs. The parents' improvement in the unit outweighed the scant evidence of risk through continuation of the assessment.
Children Act 1989 38(6)


 
 Regina (Williamson and Others) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment; CA 12-Dec-2002 - Times, 18 December 2002; [2003] QB 1300; [2002] EWCA Civ 1926; [2003] ELR 176
 
In re H (A Child) (Interim Care Order) [2002] EWCA Civ 1932; [2003] 1 FCR 350
12 Dec 2002
CA
Thorpe LJ, Lawrence Collins J
Children
Once the threshhold criteria for a care order have been met, the court must still enquire on an application for an interim care order, as to whether there is an imminent risk of really serious harm to the child, whether the risk to the child's safety requires the immediate separation requested.
Children Act 1989
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.