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.
Family - From: 1999 To: 1999
This page lists 44 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
In re KR (Abduction: Forcible Removal by Parents); FD 1999 - [1999] 2 FLR 542
Krenge v Krenge [1999] 1 FLR 969
1999
Family, Jurisdiction
The power in an English court to stay family proceedings here in favour of a foreign jurisdiction exists independently of any statute.
1 Citers
Re M (Contact: Family Assistance: McKenzie Friend); CA 1999 - [1999] 1 FLR 75
Wicken v Wicken [1999] 1 FLR 293
1999
Family
Recognition of foreign divorce.
1 Citers
Roberton v Roberton 1999 S L T 38
1999
Scotland, Family
Matrimonial Homes (Family Protection) (Scotland) Act 1991 1
1 Citers
Re A Debtor (No.488 IO of 1996), JP v A Debtor [1999] 2 BCLC 571
1999
ChD
Sir John Vinelott
Insolvency, Family
The debtor had been ordered to pay his wife a sum by way of ancillary relief in matrimonial proceedings. He then proposed an IVA, which was approved at a creditors meeting. W had notice but did not attend. She along with all other creditors was to receive a part payment in full and final settlement. She applied to revoke the approval. Held. She succeeded. She wife had a right not enjoyed by other creditors namely the freedom to assert her claim following the husband's bankruptcy notwithstanding the husband's discharge which right would be overreached if she was compelled to accept a dividend under the IVA in full and final settlement of her entitlement. She had been unfairly prejudiced to the extent that her special position had not been recognised.
Insolvency Act 1986 262
1 Citers
B v B (Occupation Orders) Times, 05 January 1999; Gazette, 13 January 1999
5 Jan 1999
CA
Family
A court which ordered a violent husband to vacate the family home to allow his wife and child to return erred in not allowing for the interests of children in the house through second relationship. These particular interests had to be given priority.
Harpal Singh Purba v Hardev Kaur Purba [1999] EWCA Civ 578
15 Jan 1999
CA
Family
Application for leave to appeal against award in ancillary relief case - granted.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
D-R v D-R and Another Times, 08 February 1999
8 Feb 1999
CA
Family
There is no presumption as between an adult child and a parent, of any right of contact in favour of the adult, even where the child suffered some mental incapacity. The court looked to the adult with disabilities' best interests, including all the circumstances, of the case.
In Re M (A Debtor) (488-Io of 1996); ChD 10-Feb-1999 - Gazette, 03 March 1999; Times, 10 February 1999
Haneef v Haneef [1999] EWCA Civ 803
17 Feb 1999
CA
Family
Application for leave to appeal out of time against ancillary relief order - applicant in prison at time of order.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Ann Deborah Alban Davies v Ifor John David Davies [1999] EWCA Civ 890
4 Mar 1999
CA
Family, Legal Professions
The marriage was unhappy. The wife consulted briefly but did not instruct a solicitor, Mr Tooth. Some 7 years later as divorce proceedings were considered, the husband did instruct Mr Tooth. She sought to prevent him acting, but then wanted to withdraw her summons. The husband would only agree if she paid the costs. She refused. Held. The summons was quite properly issued. There was a real matter to be considered. The point of view of the petitioner wife was put forward moderately it seems to me. It was met with a very strong rebuff which indicated that, come what may, the respondent husband was going to seed the dismissal of the matter with costs. There remained a real and not just fanciful risk of conflict. The husband's appeal against the costs order failed.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Sanctuary Housing Association v Donald Campbell Times, 01 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1030; [1999] 1 WLR 1279
18 Mar 1999
CA
Lord Justice Thorpe
Landlord and Tenant, Family
The claimant had granted a secure weekly tenancy of a maisonette to Mrs Campbell, which she occupied with her husband and children. Mrs Campbell then left the maisonette, leaving the husband in occupation. The husband made a proposal to the claimant whose substance was that he should be given the tenancy of the maisonette, but the claimant refused, saying that once Mrs Campbell was re-housed it would require vacant possession. Mrs Campbell was re-housed, although not by the claimant, and she then wrote to the claimant saying that she was giving up the maisonette and asking what she should do with the keys. The claimant's response was that she must empty the maisonette of her possessions before returning the keys and that until such times as the keys were returned she would be liable for the rent. Her response was that she could not do this because her husband remained in possession and had changed the locks. She enclosed her own keys with her letter. She asked to be given the opportunity to remove her own possessions from the maisonette once her husband had vacated it, following which the claimant wrote to the husband asking him to leave. He did not, and so two months later the claimant sued him for possession. Held: A wife who is a sole tenant has the full right to determine a tenancy even though her husband occupied the house at all material times, and even though this operated to deny him rights he would have against her under the Act. There had been nothing equivocal about the wife's or the claimant's acts and there had been an implied surrender of the wife's tenancy to the claimant. Lord Justice Scott: "If both tenant and landlord are unequivocally treating a tenancy as at an end the law has no business to insist on its continuance."
Matrimonial Homes Act 1983
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Tee v Tee, John Arthur Hillman Co; CA 22-Mar-1999 - Gazette, 27 October 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1056; [1999] 2 FLR 61
Burrows v Burrows Gazette, 24 March 1999
24 Mar 1999
FD
Family
An award was made for the husband to pay 50% of maximum lump sum and periodical payments of half pension income and other payments. This reflected the wife's contribution through the marriage, allowing the husband to build his business.
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25B 25C 25D
'F' v Child Support Agency; Admn 25-Mar-1999 - Times, 09 April 1999; Gazette, 28 April 1999; Gazette, 12 May 1999; [1999] EWHC Admin 262
Penelope Ann Pohl v Colin Sandford Pohl [1999] EWCA Civ 1170
14 Apr 1999
CA
Family
Husband's appeal against ancillary relief order.
[ Bailii ]
Sandra Simmons v Rajah Mackie Simmons [1999] EWCA Civ 1263
26 Apr 1999
CA
Family, Trusts
[ Bailii ]
Practice Directions (Family Proceedings: Costs) Times, 04 May 1999
4 May 1999
FD
Family
Family Courts will continue to have jurisdiction under the Inheritance and the Trusts of Land provisions. The new CPR rules on costs will apply in the Family Courts where the nearest similar procedural steps will be applied for this purpose.
Civil Procedure Rules Rule 2.4
Margaret Ruth Clarke v Malcolm Benjamin Clarke [1999] EWCA Civ 1353
6 May 1999
CA
Family
[ Bailii ]
In Re B (Child: Property Transfer) Times, 10 May 1999
10 May 1999
CA
Family
A court order in divorce proceedings transferring property to a wife 'for the benefit of the child' meant no more than for the good of the child and did not create an trust in the child's favour. The child received no part of the proceeds of sale.
Julie Ann Burne Against Johnny Dave Burne [1999] EWCA Civ 1380
11 May 1999
CA
Contempt of Court, Family
Appeal against sentence for breach of non-molestation order.
[ Bailii ]
Marja-Liisa Butler v Michael Alan Butler [1999] EWCA Civ 1405
13 May 1999
CA
Family
[ Bailii ]
Fletcher v Fletcher; CA 13-May-1999 - [1999] EWCA Civ 1406
George Nowell Clark v Julia Oriska Lambe Clark [1999] EWCA Civ 1581
15 Jun 1999
CA
Family
[ Bailii ]
Sammeh Saiid Jaffar v Ruth Anne Jaffar [1999] EWCA Civ 1589
15 Jun 1999
CA
Family
[ Bailii ]
Josephine Gay v John Sheeran, London Borough of Enfield Times, 30 June 1999; Gazette, 28 July 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1621
18 Jun 1999
CA
Family, Housing
The ability for a court to order the transfer of a secure tenancy between partners under the Act depended upon the court first making an occupation order in favour of the party from whom the tenancy was to be transferred, but the order could be made on the same occasion. To make an occupation order the tenant had to be entitled to it at the date of the application and the hearing. The Act required also that for a transfer to be made, the applicant had to have one of the rights specified. The applicant did not have such a right, and a transfer could not be ordered.
Family Law Act 1996 36
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Piglowska v Piglowski; HL 24-Jun-1999 - Times, 25 June 1999; Gazette, 07 July 1999; Gazette, 20 October 1999; [1999] UKHL 27; [1999] 3 All ER 632; [1999] 1 WLR 1360; [1999] 2 FCR 481; [1999] 2 FLR 763; [1999] Fam Law 617
Nylund v Finland Unreported - 29 June 1999
29 Jun 1999
ECHR
Human Rights, Family
Sometimes the relationship between a child's unmarried parents will be so exiguous that there will be no ipso jure family life as between the natural father and his child. But family life may nonetheless be shown to exist: �the Court considers that Article 8 cannot be interpreted as only protecting �family life� which has already been established but, where the circumstances warrant it, must extend to the potential relationship which may develop between a natural father and a child born out of wedlock. Relevant factors in this regard include the nature of the relationship between the natural parents and the demonstrable interest in and commitment by the natural father to the child both before and after the birth.� In this case, the father's claim to family life failed.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
Harpal Singh Purba v Hardev Kaur Purba [1999] EWCA Civ 1730
1 Jul 1999
CA
Stuart-Smith LJ, Pil LJ, Thorpe LJ
Family
The court considered an appeal against an award in an ancillary relief case on divorce. The husband had it was thought deliberately hidden assets, but the husband claimed that the wife's budget was excessive: (Thorpe LJ) "�.. I see no force in the criticism of the judge's acceptance of the wife's budget. In this field of litigation budgets prepared by the parties often have a high degree of unreality - usually the applicant wife's budget is much inflated. Most unusually, in this case the wife's budget seems to have been rather understated in many respects. It is true that one of the major items on the budget was substantial monthly expenditure for rent or mortgage. It is true that that could be said to be a superfluous item once the substantial lump sum was ordered. But the essential task of the judge is not to go through these budgets item by item but stand back and ask, what is the appropriate proportion of the husband's available income that should go to the support of the wife? This was a husband with �66,000 a year gross, �50,000 a year net, and of that available net income it simply could not be contended that �14,400 a year for his wholly dependent wife was excessive."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Practice Note (Family Proceedings: Vacation Business) Times, 09 July 1999
9 Jul 1999
FD
Family
Lists arrangements for family hearings during the long vacation, including Injunctions and committals and releases, children application less than one day, a matter certified as vacation business, and hearings of more than a day certified by a High Court Judge.
A Elaine Jordan v Roy Gregory Jordan [1999] EWHC Admin 666; [2000] 1 WLR 210; [1999] 2 FLR 1069; [1999] 3 FCR 481; [1999] Fam Law 695
12 Jul 1999
Admn
Simon Brown LJ, Auld LJ, Thorpe LJ
Family, International
The parties had married and divorced and made a financial settlement in the US, but the husband had returned to live in the UK. The wife now sought in effect to enforce the balance of the US order here.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
N v N (Jurisdiction: Pre-Nuptial Agreement) Times, 12 July 1999; Gazette, 11 August 1999; [1999] EWHC Fam 838; [1999] 2 FLR 745; [1999] Fam Law 691; [1999] 2 FCR 583
12 Jul 1999
FD
Wall J
Family, Ecclesiastical
A pre-nuptial agreement to abide by the decisions of the Beth Din Rabbinical Court could not be enforced so as to prevent a civil divorce proceeding through to its termination, but where the agreement required the husband first to obtain a Get, and a delay would not prejudice the child, there remained a discretion in the court to delay contact proceedings until the Get had been applied for. Although they were unenforceable as such, ante-nuptial agreements might have evidential weight in subsequent proceedings for divorce.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Hall v Hall [1999] EWCA Civ 1829
14 Jul 1999
CA
Family, Costs
[ Bailii ]
Christopher Morton Jolly v Circuit Judge; District Judge and Bailiff of Staines County Court; Chief Clerk of Staines Cc and Chief Clerk of Guildford Cc [1999] EWCA Civ 1843
15 Jul 1999
CA
Family
[ Bailii ]
McGladdery v McGladdery Times, 05 October 1999; Gazette, 29 September 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1908
21 Jul 1999
CA
Family, Company
A husband having been ordered to transfer his shares in a private company to his wife, found that she had breached the undertaking she had given as part of the order, and had used her majority shareholding to dispose of company assets out of the jurisdiction, leaving her bankrupt and unable to fulfil her part of the order, andreducing further the value of his own shareholding. His application to set aside the transfer under the section failed, since this could only apply up to the time of the order, and the court could not control a third party (the company): "There has been no extraordinary change undermining the foundation of the 1993 Order. All that has happened is that the wife has flouted it and then has frustrated its enforcement. It is important that final Orders are recognised as just that."
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 37(2)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Jordan v Jordan Times, 29 July 1999; Gazette, 11 August 1999
29 Jul 1999
CA
Family
Where a divorce had been in a competent foreign court between parties then living there, and the ancillary relief had been granted by that court, an application to enforce the ancillary relief order should first be made to the original court, and not to an English court merely because one of the parties now lived here.
Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 13
1 Cites
Re K (Child) [1999] EWCA Civ 2027
29 Jul 1999
CA
Family, Children
[ Bailii ]
Bater v Greenwich London Borough Council Gazette, 02 September 1999; Times, 28 September 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 1920; [1999] 2 FLR 993
28 Sep 1999
CA
Family, Landlord and Tenant
The couple being joint tenants of the matrimonial home had applied for its purchase form the Council. Divorce proceedings commenced and she purported to terminate the joint tenancy. He applied to set aside the notice, and the Local Authority intervened. Neither the right to buy, nor the notice to terminate were dispositions of property, and the Court had no capacity to set them aside. Held: "It is now established beyond a peradventure that a right to buy is dependant on the existence of a secure tenancy to which it is incidental."
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 37(2)(b)
[ Bailii ]
In Re W (A Minor) (Contact Application Procedure); FD 12-Oct-1999 - Gazette, 27 October 1999; Times, 12 October 1999
SRJ v DWJ (Financial Provision) Gazette, 20 October 1999; [1998] EWCA Civ 1634; [1999] 2 FLR 176
20 Oct 1999
CA
Family
There is no presumption in favour of a clean break provision in an ancillary relief claim. A nominal award of maintenance was appropriate where the wife's long dependency and continued responsibility for children made future earning capacity problematic. A dismissal of a claim for maintenance where the wife was relatively mature should not be expected. Fairness requires that the aspect of compensation should be taken into account by the court when exercising its statutory powers
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 23
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd; HL 28-Oct-1999 - Times, 02 November 1999; Gazette, 10 November 1999; [1999] 3 WLR 1113; [2001] 1 AC 27; [1999] UKHL 42; [1999] 4 All ER 705
Chief Adjudication Officer v Bath Times, 28 October 1999; [1999] EWCA Civ 3008
28 Oct 1999
CA
Family, Benefits
The claimant and her husband had been married at a Sikh temple, and lived together for many years before his death. The temple had not been accredited for marriages, and the Secretary of State resisted payment of benefits to the claimant as a widow, saying that she had not been married. Held: The claimant's appeal succeeded. There was nothing to make the marriage void, and there was a presumption of a valid marriage where the parties had gone through a ceremony and had lived together on that basis. The fact discovered many years later that the ceremony was defective would not mean that the couple were not married. This was supported by old common law rules. The validity of a marriage should be upheld wherever possible: "there is nothing to suggest that the Sikh marriage ceremony and the consequences thereof in the eyes of the Sikh religious authorities was other than such a voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. In my view that "marriage" is validated by the common law presumption from long cohabitation, in pursuance of the policy of the law that, in the absence of the clearest possible reason why there should not be such a presumption, a ceremony of "marriage" bona fide entered by parties who thereafter who live monogamously and bring up children of the union should be respected and accorded the proper legal status of marriage. "
Marriage Act 1949
1 Cites
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Helga Stoeckert v Margie Geddes (Appeal No 66 of 1998) [1999] UKPC 52
13 Dec 1999
PC
Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Saville of Newdigate, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough
Commonwealth, Trusts, Family, Wills and Probate
PC Jamaica The claimant claimed against the estate of her former partner. Though not married they had lived together for many years, and she claimed there had been an express understanding that she would receive part of his estate. A constructive trust was claimed and denied. Held: The facts alleged were not capable of sustaining the claim. Leaving the claimant in charge of his business whilst the deceased had gone to live abroad did not establish such a trust, and nor did the several statements made.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]