Tag: Children

Revenue and Customs v Ruas: CA 23 Mar 2010

The court was asked whether an obligation arose to pay child benefit for the children of a Portuguese worker resident here but no longer working for his children living in Portugal.
Held: The benefit was payable.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 291

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Council Regulation 1408/71 of 14 June 1971, Social Security, Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 146

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Martinez Sala v Freistaat Bayern ECJ 12-May-1998
ECJ A benefit such as the child-raising allowance, which is automatically granted to persons fulfilling certain objective criteria, without any individual and discretionary assessment of personal needs, and which . .

Cited by:

Cited – Tolley (Deceased) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 23-Oct-2013
The Court was asked as to entitlement to receive the care component of disability living allowance when she moved permanently from the United Kingdom to Spain. . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Tolley SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court was asked whether the United Kingdom is precluded, by Council Regulation (EC) No 1408/71 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, self-employed persons and members of their families moving within the Community, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Benefits, European, Children

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.403480

North Yorkshire County Council v Wiltshire County Council: FD 1 Jun 1999

Where a child had returned to a district, and both parents and foster parents had also left the area, it was unrealistic to lay responsibility for the child’s care at the former authority, and the proper responsible authority was that within which the child now resided.

Citations:

Times 01-Jun-1999, Gazette 27-Jun-1999

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31(8)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.84348

Re S-W: FD 1 Mar 1993

Lawyers should warn their clients of the wide range of the court’s powers in care cases. Orders can be made under other sections even though the application is under only one section. The court is not limited to the application presented, but has power to make the orders it saw to align with its first duty to treat the child’s welfare as the paramount consideration.

Citations:

Ind Summary 01-Mar-1993

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.85886

In Re S (A Minor) (Abduction: European Convention): HL 30 Jul 1997

An illegitimate child’s habitual country of residence is determined at the date of death of his mother when he was to be removed following the death. Where the mother of an illegitimate child who is resident in England dies and the grandmother takes the child to Ireland, the child remains resident in England.

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Nolan, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hutton

Citations:

Gazette 10-Sep-1997, Times 30-Jul-1997, [1997] UKHL 32, [1998] AC 750, [1997] 4 All ER 251, [1997] 3 WLR 597, [1998] 1 FLR 122, [1997] Fam Law 782, [1997] 3 FCR 293

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980, Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 12(2), Family Law Act 1986 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re P (GE) (An infant) CA 1965
A stateless child was taken by his father away from the mother in England to Israel.
Held: The wardship jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery extended to any child ‘ordinarily resident’ in this country. An infant of British nationality whether . .
Cited – In re J (a Minor) (Abduction: Custody rights) HL 1-Jul-1990
On 21 March 1990 the mother removed the child, aged two, from Australia, where he had been habitually resident, to England with the intention of permanently residing here. She did so without the knowledge of the father who also resided in Australia . .
Cited – In re B-M (Wardship: Jurisdiction) FD 1993
The court considered a child who was a German national. He was taken by his mother out of England where they had been living and where they had their habitual residence. The mother was sole custodian of the child. On the application of the father . .
Cited – In Re H (Minors) (Abduction: Custody Rights) HL 1991
The House addressed the question whether wrongful removal and wrongful retention were mutually exclusive concepts. The issue arose in the context of the commencement date for the 1985 Act as between the two States involved.
Held: For the . .
Cited – F v S (Wardship: Jurisdiction) FD 1991
. .
Cited – In Re H (Minors) (Abduction: Custody Rights) HL 1991
The House addressed the question whether wrongful removal and wrongful retention were mutually exclusive concepts. The issue arose in the context of the commencement date for the 1985 Act as between the two States involved.
Held: For the . .
Cited – F v S (Wardship: Jurisdiction) CA 1993
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.82159

MT, Regina (on The Application of) v London Borough of Hillingdon: CA 21 Jan 2010

Renewed application for permission to appeal against the refusal to grant permission to the applicant, MT, to apply for judicial review of a decision made by the London Borough of Hillingdon.

Judges:

Rimer LJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Local Government, Children, Immigration

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396705

Deticek v Sgueglia: ECJ 23 Dec 2009

ECJ (Area Of Freedom, Security and Justice) Judicial cooperation in civil matters Matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 Provisional measures concerning custody Decision enforceable in a Member State Wrongful removal of the child Other Member State Other court Custody of the child granted to the other parent Jurisdiction Urgent preliminary ruling procedure.
‘Since article 20(1) of Regulation No 2201/2003 authorises a court which does not have jurisdiction as to the substance to take, exceptionally, a provisional measure concerning parental responsibility, it must be considered that the concept of urgency in that provision relates both to the situation of the child and to the impossibility in practice of bringing the application concerning parental responsibility before the court with jurisdiction as to the substance.’

Judges:

K. Lenaerts, P

Citations:

[2009] ECR I-12193, [2009] EUECJ C-403/09, [2010] 1 Fam 104, ECLI:EU:C:2009:810, [2010] 3 WLR 1098,, [2010] Fam 104

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation No 2201/2003 20(1)

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – In re J (A Child) SC 25-Nov-2015
The court considered for the first time the scope of the jurisdiction conferred by article 11 of the 1996 Convention ‘in all cases of urgency’ upon the Contracting State where a child is present but not habitually resident. F had obtained an order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384491

Regina v Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Committee Ex Parte B: CA 10 Mar 1995

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.’

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR

Citations:

Independent 14-Mar-1995, Times 15-Mar-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

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Watts, Regina (on the Application of) v Bedford Primary Care Trust and others Admn 1-Oct-2003
The claimant sought hip-replacement treatment. She was first told that she would have to wait a year. As her lawyers pressed the respondent, she looked at obtaining treatment in France. As she decided to take the treatment, the respondent reduced . .
Cited – Rogers, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health Admn 15-Feb-2006
The claimant suffered breast cancer. She sought treatment from the defendant with a drug called Herceptin, and now sought judicial review of the refusal of such treatment. Various stages in the licensing of the drug were yet to be completed. It was . .
Cited – Rogers, Regina (on the Application of) v Swindon NHS Primary Care Trust CA 12-Apr-2006
The claimant challenged the policy of her local health authority not to allow prescription to her of the drug Herceptin.
Held: The policy had not been settled upon lawfully and was to be set aside. On the one hand the PCT developed a policy . .
See Also – Regina v Cambridge and Huntingdonshire Health Authority Ex Parte B (No 2) CA 27-Oct-1995
A child’s anonymity could removed, where publicity could generate cash for required treatment. . .
Cited – Elgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Children

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.86273

Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council: SC 18 Oct 2017

The claimant had been abused as a child by foster parents with whom she had been placed by the respondent authority. The court was now asked, the Council not having been negligent, were they in any event liable having a non-delegable duty of care with accompanying vicarious liability?
Held: The appeal succeeded (Lord Hughes dissenting). The local authority was vicariously liable for the torts committed by the foster parents in this case. However, the proposition that a local authority is under a duty to ensure that reasonable care is taken for the safety of children in care, while they are in the care and control of foster parents, is too broad, and that the responsibility with which it fixes local authorities is too demanding.

Judges:

Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 60, [2018] PIQR P4, [2017] PTSR 1382, [2018] AC 355, [2017] 3 WLR 1000, [2018] 1 FLR 329, (2017) 20 CCL Rep 417, [2018] 1 All ER 1, UKSC 2016/0004

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC Video 20170208 am, SC Video 20170208 pm, SC Video 20170209 pm, SC Video 20170209 am

Statutes:

Children and Young Persons Act 1969, Child Care Act 1980, Boarding-Out of Children Regulations 1955

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
Cited – KLB v British Columbia 2-Oct-2003
Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Torts – Liability – Intentional torts – Abuse of children by foster parents – Whether government can be held liable for harm children suffered in foster care – Whether government . .
Cited – The Catholic Child Welfare Society and Others v Various Claimants and The Institute of The Brothers of The Christian Schools and Others SC 21-Nov-2012
Law of vicarious liability is on the move
Former children at the children’s homes had sought damages for sexual and physical abuse. The court heard arguments as to the vicarious liability of the Society for abuse caused by a parish priest visiting the school. The Court of Appeal had found . .
Cited – Woodland v Essex County Council SC 23-Oct-2013
The claimant had been seriously injured in an accident during a swimming lesson. She sought to claim against the local authority, and now appealed against a finding that it was not responsible, having contracted out the provision of swimming . .
Appeal from – NA v Nottinghamshire County Council QBD 2-Dec-2014
The claimant said that as a child the defendant had failed in its duty to protect her from her abusive mother and later from foster parents.
Held: Males J, dealt with the issues of liability and limitation, leaving issues concerning causation . .
At CA – NA v Nottinghamshire County Council CA 12-Nov-2015
Appeal against finding that a local authority was not responsible for the sexual abuse of the appellant whilst with foster carers as a child.
Held: As to whether the duty as non-delegable, such a duty must relate to a function which the local . .
Removal of Anonymity – Armes v Nottinghamshire County Council QBD 15-Nov-2016
Application to set aside anonymity order granted in earlier proceedings alleging sexual abuse. . .
Cited – New South Wales v Lepore 6-Feb-2003
Austlii (High Court of Australia) 1. Appeal allowed in part
2. Paragraph 2 of the order of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales made on 23 April 2001 set aside, and in its place, order that the judgment . .
Cited – Cox v Ministry of Justice SC 2-Mar-2016
The claimant was working in a prison supervising working prisoners. One of them dropped a bag of rice on her causing injury. At the County Curt, the prisoner was found negligence in the prisoner, but not the appellant for vicarious liability. The . .
Cited – S v Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council CA 1985
The court was asked whether local authorities are vicariously liable for torts committed by foster parents against children placed with them while in care.
Held: The claim was rejected. The critical question was whether the foster parents were . .
Cited – Carmarthenshire County Council v Lewis HL 17-Feb-1955
The House considered the unexplained fact that in the temporary absence of the teacher (who, on the evidence, was not negligent) it was possible for a child of four to wander from the school premises onto the highway, through a gate which was either . .
Cited – Perry and Another v Harris (A Minor) CA 31-Jul-2008
The defendant had organised a children’s party. The claimant (11) was injured when a bigger boy was allowed to use the bouncy castle at the same time. The defendants appealed the award of damages.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The relevant . .
Cited – Morris v C W Martin and Sons Ltd CA 1965
The plaintiff took her mink stole to the defendants for cleaning. An employee received and stole the fur. The judge had held that the defendants were not liable because the theft was not committed in the course of employment.
Held: The . .
Cited – Port Swettenham Authority v T W Wu and Co (M) Sdn Bhd PC 19-Jun-1978
A gratuitous bailee assumes a duty to take reasonable care of the chattel: ‘This standard, although high, may be a less exacting standard than that which the common law requires of a bailee for reward [but] the line between the two standards is a . .
Cited – Myton v Woods CA 1980
A claim was made against a local education authority for the negligence of a taxi firm employed by the authority to drive children to and from school.
Held: The claim failed. The authority had no statutory duty to transport children, but only . .
Cited – Surtees v Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames CA 27-Mar-1991
Because children can injure themselves in so many ways, someone caring for them is not universally liable for injury to a child in their care.
A duty owed in respect of a parent’s own child may be lower. . .
Cited – JGE v The English Province of Our Lady of Charity and Another QBD 8-Nov-2011
The court was asked as a preliminary issue who should be the defendant where a claim was made of rape and other assaults by a priest who was a member of the diocese of the second defendant, but employed by the first defendant school. . .
Cited – Barrett v London Borough of Enfield HL 17-Jun-1999
The claimant had spent his childhood in foster care, and now claimed damages against a local authority for decisions made and not made during that period. The judge’s decision to strike out the claim had been upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Cited – Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Ltd HL 3-May-2001
A school board employed staff to manage a residential school for vulnerable children. The staff committed sexual abuse of the children. The school denied vicarious liability for the acts of the teachers.
Held: ‘Vicarious liability is legal . .

Cited by:

Cited – Barclays Bank Plc v Various Claimants SC 1-Apr-2020
The Bank had employed a doctor to provide medical assessments as necessary. The doctor had used the opportunities presented to assault sexually many patients. The court was now asked whether the Bank was vicariously liable for the acts of this . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Vicarious Liability, Local Government, Negligence, Children

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.597257

Re S (A Child) (Foreign Contact Order): CA 16 Jun 2009

The registration of an order under BIIR is ‘essentially administrative, although it requires a judicial act’

Judges:

Thorpe, Wall LJJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 993, [2010] 1 FCR 258, [2010] 1 FLR 982, [2009] Fam Law 1138

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re D (A Child) SC 22-Jun-2016
F had obtained an order in Romania for the custody of D. F obtained orders initially for the registration and enforcement of that order, but the High Court reversed that saying that neither the child nor his mother had been given adeuate opportunity . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.375596

Regina v H (reasonable Chastisement): CACD 17 May 2001

The defence of reasonable chastisement of a child by his parent remained available despite the Human Rights Act. When directing the jury the judge must give a detailed direction requesting them to consider the nature duration and context of the act, the physical and mental consequences to the child, the age and personal characteristics of the child, and the reasons given for administering the punishment. Standards of reasonableness had changed over time, and there is no impropriety in a judge allowing for this in his directions to the jury.

Citations:

Times 17-May-2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Human Rights, Children

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.88488

Principal Reporter, Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration, Re Suspension Ad Interim Of an Interlocutor: SCS 30 Jun 2009

(Outer House)

Citations:

[2009] ScotCS CSOH – 94, [2009] CSOH 94

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children (Scotland) Act 1995 93(2)(b)(c)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Appeal from – The Principal Reporter v JPK and Another SCS 21-Jan-2010
. .
At Outer House – Principal Reporter v K SC 15-Dec-2010
The court was asked as to the right of an unmarried father to take part in Children’s hearings under the 1995 Act, and depending on the answer whether the scheme was human rights compliant. K was father of the child, but the mother was unmarried. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.347770

In re M (A Child): CA 18 Mar 2008

The parents had been involved in bitter and very public divorce and ancillary relief proceedings. Application had been made to redact from the public report of the proceedings matters relating their child. The mother appealed against the order made.
Held: The appeal failed.
Thorpe LJ said that ‘although all litigants have a confident expectation of a private hearing, no litigant can have a confident expectation that the resulting judgment will not be released to the public domain.’
Wall desribed the order as a classic case of a judge exercising a discretion. The case of Bellenden, as approved in G v G is the leading case. Following that ‘the function of this court in my judgment is to review the decision made by the judge and to ask itself whether or not any of the following three questions is arguable:
1) Did the judge leave out of account or not give sufficient weight to any particular factor in the case?
2) Has he given no weight or inadequate weight to factors which are relevant? And
3) In the performance of what has become popularly known as the balancing exercise, has he reached a conclusion which was plainly wrong or arguably plainly wrong?’

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Wall LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1543

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347061

TDT, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 29 Jul 2016

The claimant child alleged that the defendant had released him from administrative immigration detention without first putting safeguarding arrangements in place, leave him iat risk, in particular of becoming victim to human trafficking.

Judges:

McGowan J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1912 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Children, Human Rights

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.567874

F v M: FD 1 Apr 2004

The court considered the ‘ongoing debate’ about the court’s role in contact disputes. ‘this case illustrates all too uncomfortably the failings of the system. There is much wrong with our system and the time has come for us to recognise that fact and to face up to it honestly. If we do not we risk forfeiting public confidence. ‘ The father in this case had behaved unwisely but the blame overwhelmingly lay with the mother who had set her mind against contact.’ The court gave guidnace on how courts should approach the management of such cases in future.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 727 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – A Father (Mr A) v A Mother (Mrs A); Their Two Children (B And C) FD 4-Feb-2004
After a divorce, the father sought a joint residence order for the two young children. The mother alleged sexually inappropriate behaviour by the father. The court found this allegation clearly untrue. The dispute was bitter and protracted. . .
Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Cited – Re M (Intractable Contact Dispute: Interim Care Orders) FD 2003
The mother had persuaded her children of the lie that their father had physically and sexually abused them, and that their paternal grandparents were also a danger to them. She would not allow any contact with them, and disobeyed court orders for . .
Cited – The Father v The Mother, O by Cafcass Legal; In re O (a Child) (Contact: Withdrawal of application) FD 12-Dec-2003
The father sought to withdraw his application for contact, but the court took the opportunity to explain some points relating to contact disputes.
Held: Such disputes engender very deep feelings. Courts must ensure contact with both parents . .
Cited – S (A Child), Re CA 28-Jan-2004
‘The courts recognise the critical importance of the role of both parents in the lives of their children. The courts are not anti-father and pro-mother or vice versa. The court’s task, imposed by Parliament in section 1 of the Children Act 1989 in . .
Mentioned – Hokkanen v Finland ECHR 23-Sep-1994
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Not necessary to examine P7-5; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and . .
Mentioned – Sophia Gudrun Hansen v Turkey ECHR 23-Sep-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Pecuniary damage – financial award ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings ; Costs . .
Mentioned – Ignaccolo-Zenide v Romania ECHR 2000
‘Although coercive measures towards children are far from desirable in such sensitive matters, sanctions should not be ruled out where the parent living with the children acts unlawfully.’ . .
Mentioned – Nuutinen v Finland ECHR 27-Jun-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 8; Not necessary to examine other complaint under Art. 8; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses . .
Cited – Kosmopoulou v Greece ECHR 5-Feb-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Mentioned – Sylvester v Austria ECHR 15-Sep-2010
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings ; Costs and . .
Mentioned – Glaser v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Sep-2000
‘The essential object of Article 8 is to protect individuals against arbitrary interference by public authorities. There may however be positive obligations inherent in an effective ‘respect’ for family life. These obligations may involve the . .
Cited – Hoppe v Germany ECHR 5-Dec-2002
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 . .
Cited – Hornsby v Greece ECHR 19-Mar-1997
Hudoc Violation of Art. 6-1; Preliminary objection rejected; Just satisfaction reserved – Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award
The rights . .
Cited – Immobiliare Saffi v Italy ECHR 28-Jul-1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Cited – Sommerfeld v Germany ECHR 11-Oct-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 14+8; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings . .
Cited – Sahin v Germany ECHR 11-Oct-2001
When considering the issues of an adoption against the wishes of the parents, there is an apparent difference of emphasis between saying that the child’s interests are of ‘paramount importance’, and saying that they merely ‘may, depending on their . .
Cited – In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal) CA 24-Oct-2002
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, . .
Cited – Sommerfeld v Germany ECHR 8-Jul-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 8 ; Violation of Art. 14+8 with regard to right of access ; Violation of Art. 14+8 with regard to right of appeal ; Not necessary to examine Art. . .
Cited – Practice Direction (Care Cases: Judicial Continuity and Judicial Case Management) 2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.195570

Re EV (A Child): SC 1 Mar 2017

Appeal from application for permanence order. EV had been in care from her birth. Her parents, each with long standing learning difficulties opposed the order.
Held: The Court allowed the parents’ appeals. The meeting of the threshold test was a question for the judge as a fact for him to find. He was exercising more than a supervisory role over the local authority. A finding as to the future likelihood of harm could not be made solely on allegations or suspicions, but instead required facts established on a balance of probabilities.
Held: The appeal was allowed. ‘It is entirely understandable that the Second Division should have sought to avoid further delay in determining the future of this young child. Nevertheless, with the greatest respect, the Lord Ordinary’s opinion did not provide a satisfactory basis for the Inner House to grant the application itself. In relying on the Lord Ordinary’s opinion to justify the conclusion that the threshold test had been met and that a permanence order should be made, the Second Division rendered their conclusion vulnerable to some of the same criticisms as his opinion. It involved taking account of unproved allegations of criminal conduct, contrary to the guidance given in In re J, which it is now conceded should be followed when applying the Scottish legislation. It involved finding that the threshold test was satisfied without clearly explaining what exactly the apprehended detriment was, why it was considered serious, and why it was considered likely (a ‘risk’ of serious detriment not being enough). It involved no consideration of the child’s racial origin and cultural and linguistic background, to which the court is required by statute to have regard. It involved the same failure as the Lord Ordinary’s opinion to explain satisfactorily why a permanence order should be made, on the basis of a reasoned analysis of the available options and an assessment of their respective pros and cons.’

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 15, 2017 Fam LR 34, 2017 GWD 8-114, 2017 SC (UKSC) 67, UKSC 2016/0220

Links:

Bailii, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 12/01/17 am Video, SC 12/01/17 pm Video

Statutes:

Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – In re J (Children) SC 20-Feb-2013
The mother had been, whilst in a previous relationship, involved in care proceedings after the death from physical abuse of her baby. Whilst being severely critical of her, the court had been unable to identify the author of the child’s death. Now, . .
Cited – In Re KD (A Minor) (Ward: Termination of Access) HL 1988
The local authority sought to terminate parental contact with a child taken into care under a wardship.
Held: The court had to consider the human rights of the parent as against the welfare interest of the child. Lord Oliver of Aylmerton said: . .
Cited – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Cited – In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening) HL 11-Jun-2008
Balance of probabilities remains standard of proof
There had been cross allegations of abuse within the family, and concerns by the authorities for the children. The judge had been unable to decide whether the child had been shown to be ‘likely to suffer significant harm’ as a consequence. Having . .
Cited – In Re KD (A Minor) (Ward: Termination of Access) HL 1988
The local authority sought to terminate parental contact with a child taken into care under a wardship.
Held: The court had to consider the human rights of the parent as against the welfare interest of the child. Lord Oliver of Aylmerton said: . .
Cited – In re S-B (Children) (Care proceedings: Standard of proof) SC 14-Dec-2009
A child was found to have bruising consistent with physical abuse. Either or both parents might have caused it, but the judge felt it likely that only one had, that he was unable to decide which, and that they were not so serious that he had to say . .
Cited – TW and JW v Aberdeenshire Council SCS 5-Apr-2012
(Extra Division) The court rejected an argument that sections 84(3) and (4) had a particular core status. It said that subsections (3), (4) and (5) impose separate requirements, all of which have a bearing on whether a permanence order should be . .
Cited – Re B (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Threshold Criteria) SC 12-Jun-2013
B had been removed into care at birth. The parents now appealed against a care order made with a view to B’s adoption. The Court was asked as to the situation where the risks were necessarily only anticipated, and as to appeals against a finding of . .
Appeal from – West Lothian Council v MB and KV SCS 20-Jul-2016
(Second Division, Inner House) The primary source of the local authority’s concerns in relation to the child arose from what the Lord Ordinary described as ‘perceived concerns about the behaviour of [the father]’. The first concern, of particular . .
Cited – KR v Stirling Council SCS 24-May-2016
The Court discussed the tests in section 83 for the granting of authority for adoption. They include a requirement that the court must be satisfied that the child has been, or is likely to be, placed for adoption.
Lord Drummond Young stated: . .
Cited – TW and JW v Aberdeenshire Council SCS 5-Apr-2012
(Extra Division) The court rejected an argument that sections 84(3) and (4) had a particular core status. It said that subsections (3), (4) and (5) impose separate requirements, all of which have a bearing on whether a permanence order should be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.577935

Birmingham City Council v S and others: FD 1 Dec 2006

Care proceedings had been issued in respect of A at birth. The father sought a decision as to whether the paternal parents could be informed of the birth. He was from a Muslim background and feared that if told at the wrong time they might reject A.

Judges:

Sumner J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3065 (Fam), [2007] UKHRR 588, [2007] 1 FLR 1223, [2007] Fam Law 300

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279029

DJ v MS: FD 10 Apr 2006

Appeal by a father, D J, from an order placing a restriction on the father’s ability to make any further applications to the court pursuant to section 91(14) of the Children Act. The order was made in the context of an application by the father for contact to his daughter,
Held: The District Judge went too far: ‘the power to restrict applications to the court is discretionary and in the exercise of its discretion the court must weigh in the balance all the relevant circumstances. The third one, an important consideration, is that to impose a restriction is a statutory intrusion to the right of a party to bring proceedings before the court and to be heard in matters affecting his/her child. Fourthly, the power is therefore to be used with great care and sparingly, the exception and not the rule. Fifthly, it is generally to be seen as a weapon of last resort in cases of repeated and unreasonable applications. Of course any attempt to define circumstances in which this very useful power is or is not employed always falls foul of some specific factor, but I do bear those matters very much in mind. However, I think, as I have indicated, that on this particular occasion this extremely experienced district judge went further than he should or needed to in the circumstances.’

Judges:

Coleridge J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1491 (Fam), [2006] 2 FLR 1213

Links:

Bailii

Children

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279018

in Re B; RB v FB and MA (Forced Marriage: Wardship: Jurisdiction): FD 15 Apr 2008

The court exercised the wardship jurisdiction in respect of a 15 year old girl born and brought up in Pakistan, who had never been here but did have dual Pakistani and British nationality. She had gone to the High Commission in Islamabad asking to be rescued from a forced marriage and helped to come to Scotland to live with her half-brother. The High Commission wanted to help her but felt unable to do so without the backing of a court order. Hogg J made the girl a ward of court and ordered that she be brought to this country. The half-brother was assessed as offering a suitable home and in fact she went to him. Hogg J explained that she thought the circumstances ‘sufficiently dire and exceptional’

Judges:

Hogg J

Citations:

[2008] 2 FLR 1624, [2008] Fam Law 983, [2008] EWHC 1436 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A v A and another (Children) (Children: Habitual Residence) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening) SC 9-Sep-2013
Acquisition of Habitual Residence
Habitual residence can in principle be lost and another habitual residence acquired on the same day.
Held: The provisions giving the courts of a member state jurisdiction also apply where there is an alternative jurisdiction in a non-member . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, International

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278550

In Re C (A Minor) (Interim Care Order: Residential Assessment): HL 29 Nov 1996

The parents were suspected of causing the child non-accidental injury. The court wanted a residential assessment of the family, but the local authority refused, saying it would be too expensive, and would expose the child to continuing risk. The judge made an interim care order and gave an order for a residential assessment. The parents now appealed the decision of the Court of Appeal reversing that order.
Held: The parents’ appeal succeeded. An order for an assessment of a child together with the child’s family in a residential unit was within the power of the court assessing the need for a care order, and the court had power to override the authority’s objections if that was required to make its own decision. The section is to be given a wide reading, and the Act read purposively. Sections 38 (6) and (7) were not restricted to medical and psychiatric assessment alone. It was clear from the Act that ‘any other assessment’ of the child could be ordered. This could cover an assessment of the interaction between the child and parent. Though the the court may not order a child or a parent to participate in an assessment under s 38(6) it can override the powers the Local Authority.

Lord Browne-Wilkinson: ‘This broad approach is supported by consideration of s 38(7) which does not appear to have been drawn to the attention of the Court of Appeal either in Re M or in the present case. Subsection (7) confers on the court the power to prohibit an examination or assessment which the local authority is proposing to make. It is manifestly directed to the type of conduct by social services revealed by the Cleveland Inquiry, ie repeated interviews and assessments of the child and his parents which are detrimental to the child. This negative control by the court cannot have been intended to be limited to cases where the child, and only the child, is to be assessed. If it is to be fully effective to prevent damage to the child, the power under s 38(7) must also extend to cases where it is proposed to assess the relationship between the parents and the child.’ and ‘ . . it is impossible to assess a young child divorced from his environment. The interaction between the child and his parents or other persons looking after him is an essential element in making any assessment of the child.’

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Griffiths, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hope of Craighead

Citations:

Times 29-Nov-1996, [1996] UKHL 4, [1997] AC 489, [1996] 4 All ER 871, [1997] 1 FLR 1, [1997] Fam Law 228, [1997] 1 FCR 149, 95 LGR 367

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(6) 38(7)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not Followed – In Re M (Interim Care Order: Assessment) CA 2-Jan-1996
There was no jurisdiction under section 38(6) to order residential assessment of a family involved in care proceedings. The words ‘other assessment of the child’ had to be construed as ejusdem generis with the words ‘medical or psychiatric . .
Cited – In re L CA 1996
In exercising its jurisdiction under the Act, the court’s function is investigative and non-adversarial. Ward LJ: the court had no power to order a residential assessment at a specified place. Millett LJ agreed, but said that a judge could impose ‘a . .

Cited by:

Cited – In Re M (Residential Assessment Directions) FD 23-Sep-1998
When ordering a local authority to pay the costs of residential assessment of mother and child, the court should allow for these factors. It must be assessment not treatment, in long term interests of the child, to enable court to decide and not . .
Cited – SD, Re Application for Judicial Review OHCS 2-Oct-2003
Parents sought judicial review of a decision not to open a Record of Needs for their child. A report said that the child was dyslexic. The applicants said his condition had not improved after an earlier request to open a record had been refused.
Cited – In re G (a Child) (Interim Care order: Residential assessment) CA 27-Jan-2004
An elder child had died, and the local authority felt unable to exculpate either the father or the mother. On the birth of this child all three had been brought in for a residential assessment. First one then another extension was sought. The court . .
Applied – Re M (Residential Assessment Directions) CA 1997
The mother was seen to be unstable with a history of self harm, and with a violent association. Two older children were in care, and despite psychiatric evidence that she was improving the authority resisted a suggestion that there be a residential . .
Cited – Kent County Council v G and others HL 24-Nov-2005
A residential assessment order had been made under the 1989 Act in care proceedings. When the centre recommended a second extension of the assessment, the council refused, saying that the true purpose was not the assessment of the child but the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.81774

Johnson, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 19 Oct 2016

The court was asked: ‘Is it compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights to deny British citizenship to the child of a British father and a non-British mother simply because they were not married to one another at the time of his birth or at any time thereafter? If the parents had been married to one another, their child would have been a British citizen. If the mother had been British and the father non-British, their child would have been a British citizen. If the child had been born after 1 July 2006 he would have been a British citizen. The child is not responsible for the marital status of his parents or the date of his birth, yet it is he who suffers the consequences.’
Held: The appeal was allowed. The liability to deportation by reason of the accident of his birth outside wedlock was unlawfully discriminatory.
The right to a nationality is not as such a Convention right but denial of citizenship when it has
important effects on a person’s identity falls within the ambit of article 8 and so triggers the application
of the prohibition of discrimination in article 14. Birth outside wedlock is a ‘status’ for the
purpose of article 14 and falls within the class of ‘suspect’ grounds where very weighty reasons are
required to justify discrimination. In Mr Johnson’s case, what needed to be justified was his
current liability to deportation when he would not be so liable but for the accident of birth outside
wedlock for which he was not responsible. No justification had been suggested for this and it cannot
therefore be said that his claim that deportation would breach his Convention rights was clearly unfounded.

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes, Lord Toulson

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 56, UKSC 2016/0042, [2016] WLR(D) 531, [2017] AC 365, [2017] INLR 235, [2016] 3 WLR 1267, [2017] Imm AR 306, 41 BHRC 711

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Genovese v Malta ECHR 11-Oct-2011
The applicant was illegitimate, born to a British mother and a Maltese father. Paternity had been established scientifically and in judicial proceedings. The father refused to recognise his son on the birth certificate, and the applicant’s mother . .
At Admn – Johnson, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 17-Jul-2014
The court was asked whether the Claimant’s proposed deportation to Jamaica, following his conviction and imprisonment for a very serious criminal offence, involves a violation of article 14 in conjunction with article 8 of the European Convention on . .
Cited – Johnson, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 26-Jan-2016
The appellant was Jamaican by birth, but had lived here with his British father since the age of four. Had his parents been married, he would have had British nationality. As he grew to an adult he was convicted on several serious matters. He now . .
At CA – Johnson, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 26-Jan-2016
The appellant was Jamaican by birth, but had lived here with his British father since the age of four. Had his parents been married, he would have had British nationality. As he grew to an adult he was convicted on several serious matters. He now . .
Cited – K v Netherlands ECHR 1-Jul-1985
Discrimination; Immigration; Nationality; Right to respect for private and family life . .
Cited – Michalak v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 6-Mar-2002
The appellant had occupied for a long time a room in a house let by the authority. After the death of the tenant, the appellant sought, but was refused, a statutory tenancy. He claimed to be a member of the tenant’s family, and that the list of . .
Cited – Karassev v Finland ECHR 12-Jan-1999
Admissibility. The arbitrary denial of citizenship may violate the right to respect for private life under Article 8. The Convention did not guarantee the right to acquire a particular nationality. Nevertheless, it did ‘not exclude that an arbitrary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.570161

W, Regina (on the Application of) v North Lincolnshire Council: Admn 30 Jul 2008

W sought assistance from the Council. As a 17 year old without significant family support he had been released from custody and was entitled to admitted support under section 20 of the 1989 Act.

Judges:

Mackie QC J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2299 (Admin), [2008] 2 FLR 2150, [2008] Fam Law 1196

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 17 19 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276988

M, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Barnet: Admn 6 Aug 2008

Challenge to the alleged ongoing refusal by the defendant to acknowledge its obligations to her under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 and therefore its alleged ongoing failure to comply with its obligations to her as a looked after, and therefore an eligible, child for the purposes of the leaving care provisions.

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2354 (Admin), [2008] Fam Law 1197, [2009] 2 FLR 725

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Local Government

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276993

In re S (A Child): CA 12 Aug 2008

The mother of the child applied for leave to appeal against an order under section 38(9), seeking a residential assessment.
Held: The judge had been exercising a discretion which he had done properly, and the court would not interfere with it.

Judges:

Mummery LJ, Wall LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1078

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(9)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Re L and H (Residential Assessment); CT and Another v Bristol City Council and others CA 14-Mar-2007
Application for leave to appeal against refusal to order residential assessment under section 38(6). ECHR Articles 6 and 8, and the underlying philosophy of the 1989 Act, required that a case be fully investigated and that all the relevant evidence . .
Cited – In Re G (A Minor) (Interim Care Order: Residential Assessment); G (Children), In Re (Residence: Same Sex Partner) HL 26-Jul-2006
The parties had been a lesbian couple each with children. Each now was in a new relationship. One registered the two daughters of the other at a school now local to her but without first consulting the birth mother, who then applied for residence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276834

KR, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another: Admn 30 Jul 2008

The claimant had been involved in child contact and residence proceedings as a result of which the children travelled extensively between two towns. He now appealed after withdrawal of the community care grants made to meet the cost of the travel.

Judges:

Bean J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1881 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Benefits

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.272814

In Re M (Residential Assessment Directions): FD 23 Sep 1998

When ordering a local authority to pay the costs of residential assessment of mother and child, the court should allow for these factors. It must be assessment not treatment, in long term interests of the child, to enable court to decide and not unreasonable. As to Re C: ‘ . . it does seem to me that both the words of the section and the language of Lord Browne-Wilkinson nevertheless impose some limits on the extent of the court’s powers. They are limited to a process that can properly be characterised as ‘assessment’ rather than ‘treatment’, although no doubt all treatment is accompanied by a continuing process of assessment. And they are limited to a process which bona fide involves the participation of the child as an integral part of what is being assessed.’

Judges:

Holman J

Citations:

Gazette 23-Sep-1998, [1998] 2 FLR 371

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In Re C (A Minor) (Interim Care Order: Residential Assessment) HL 29-Nov-1996
The parents were suspected of causing the child non-accidental injury. The court wanted a residential assessment of the family, but the local authority refused, saying it would be too expensive, and would expose the child to continuing risk. The . .

Cited by:

Distinguished – In re G (a Child) (Interim Care order: Residential assessment) CA 27-Jan-2004
An elder child had died, and the local authority felt unable to exculpate either the father or the mother. On the birth of this child all three had been brought in for a residential assessment. First one then another extension was sought. The court . .
Cited – Re D (Jurisdiction: Programme of Assessment or Therapy) CA 12-May-1999
The parents were dependent on drugs. The guardian ad litem proposed that the authority should fund treatment of the parents and child in a residential unit with assessment. The authority proposed a detoxification programme. The authority appealed an . .
Cited – Kent County Council v G and others HL 24-Nov-2005
A residential assessment order had been made under the 1989 Act in care proceedings. When the centre recommended a second extension of the assessment, the council refused, saying that the true purpose was not the assessment of the child but the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.85829

Liverpool City Council, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hillingdon and AK: Admn 18 Jul 2008

Two local authorities disputed who should take responsibility for the care of a vulnerable young person. He had first claimed asylum in Liverpool, then was detained in Oxfordshire and last in Hillingdon who returned him on his request to Liverpool, who then refused responsibility.
Held: The connection was with Liverpool, and Hillingdon’s involvement ceased on his return to Liverpool.

Judges:

Goudie QC J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1702 (Admin), Times 03-Oct-2008

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Liverpool City Council, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Hillingdon and Another CA 10-Feb-2009
The applicant asylum-seeker had arrived in Hillingdon and claimed that he required assistance, that he was a child, and that he wanted to go to Liverpool. Hillingdon had assisted him to do so. Liverpool now appealed against a finding that it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government, Immigration

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271103

Medway Council v G and others: FD 18 Jul 2008

The court considered the extent of publicity for a case where the local authority was to be criticised.

Judges:

Sir Mark Potter P

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1681 (Fam), [2008] 2 FLR 1687

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Doctor A and Others v Ward and Another FD 8-Jan-2010
Parents wished to publicise the way care proceedings had been handled, naming the doctors, social workers and experts some of whom had been criticised. Their names had been shown as initials so far, and interim contra mundum orders had been made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Children

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.270964

E v E: FD 20 Feb 2007

The father came to England and met the mother. They had a family, moving to Australia after the birth of the first child and moved back to England. AFter they flew back to Australia, the mother again returned to England with the children. The father now sought their return.
Held: Before leaving for Australia on the last occasion, the mother had made it clear that it was not her intention to stay there.

Judges:

Sir Mark Potter P

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 276 (Fam), [2007] 1 FLR 1977, [2007] Fam Law 480

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.267147

C v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 8 Feb 2008

The court considered the practice of hearing submissions from the media in relation to reporting restrictions.
Held: Thomas LJ rejected the submission that, in conducting the Re S balancing exercise the Court should have regard to the public profile of the appellant: ‘That is because it is fundamental that all persons are equal before the law of England and Wales, as embodied in our common law, our legislation and the Conventions to which this party (sic) has subscribed . . No person in this country can enjoy a different status because he holds a public position. It is important to stress that.’

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Thomas LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 854 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2008/854.html 39(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Crawford v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 4-Feb-2008
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4) Admn 4-Feb-2009
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of . .
Cited – Child X (Residence and Contact- Rights of Media Attendance) (Rev 2) FD 14-Jul-2009
The father applied to the court to have the media excluded from the hearing into the residence and contact claims relating to his daughter.
Held: It was for the party seeking such an order to justify it. In deciding whether or not to exclude . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Magistrates, Children, Media

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.267080

Irene M Scott v The United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 2000

(Admissibility) The court was asked whether the mother’s Article 8 rights had been breached by a local authority who had applied to free her child for adoption, the court once again stated that ‘the best interests of the child is always of crucial importance’.

Citations:

34745/97, [2000] ECHR 698, 2000 Fam LR 102, [2000] 1 FLR 958, [2000] Fam Law 538, [2000] 2 FCR 560

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Payne v Payne; P v P CA 13-Feb-2001
No presumption for Mother on Relocation
The mother applied for leave to return to New Zealand taking with the parties’ daughter aged four. The father opposed the move, saying that allowing the move would infringe his and the child’s right to family life. He had been refused residence.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263016

Gough (an Infant) v Thorns: CA 1 Jul 1966

The plaintiff child was injured in a road traffic accident. She appealed from a finding that she had been contributorily negligent.
Held: The appeal succeeded.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘A very young child cannot be guilty of contributory negligence. An older child may be. But it depends on the circumstances. A judge should only find a child guilty of contributory negligence if he or she is of such an age as to be expected to take precautions for his or her own safety: and then he or she is only to be found guilty if blame should be attached to him or her. A child has not the road sense or the experience of his or her elders. He or she is not to be found guilty unless he or she is blameworthy.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Danckwerts, Salmon LJJ

Citations:

[1966] EWCA Civ 5, [1966] 1 WLR 1387, [1966] 3 All ER 398

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Children

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262790

In re B (A Child) (Non-accidental Injury): CA 24 Apr 2002

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.

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Buxton LJ, Jackson J

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 752, [2002] 2 FLR 1133, [2002] Fam Law 879, [2002] 3 FCR 85

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lancashire County Council v R (A Minor) and others FD 4-Dec-2008
The local authority sought a care order, alleging serious physical abuse of the child. The mother said that any injuries had been inflicted by the father. The father said that the cause was the mother.
Held: The injuries were not likely to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258650

British Broadcasting Corporation v CAFCASS Legal and others: FD 30 Mar 2007

Parents of a child had resisted care proceedings, and now wished the BBC to be able to make a TV programme about their case. They applied to the court for the judgment to be released. Applications were also made to have a police officer’s and medical staffs’ and social workers’ names to be excised.
Held: There is an emerging consensus that, at least in care cases, judgments should be published, albeit in anonymised form, Subject to appropriate anonymisation, the material should be published.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 616 (Fam), [2007] 2 FLR 765

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – B (A Child); Re C (Welfare of Child: Immunisation) CA 30-Jul-2003
The father sought a specific issue order for the immunisation of his child in particular with the MMR vaccine. The mother opposed all immunisation.
Held: Whether a child was to be refused immunisation was an issue on which both parents should . .
Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Cited – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Cited – Clayton v Clayton CA 27-Jun-2006
The family had been through protracted family law proceedings and had been subject to orders restricting identification. The father now wanted to discuss his experiences and to campaign. He could not do so without his child being identified.
Cited – A Local Authority v W L W T and R; In re W (Children) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) FD 14-Jul-2005
An application was made by a local authority to restrict publication of the name of a defendant in criminal proceedings in order to protect children in their care. The mother was accused of having assaulted the second respondent by knowingly . .
Cited – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
Cited – Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others HL 28-Oct-1999
Fair Coment on Political Activities
The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the . .
Cited – George Galloway MP v The Telegraph Group Ltd CA 25-Jan-2006
The defendant appealed agaiunst a finding that it had defamed the claimant by repeating the contents of papers found after the invasion of Iraq which made claims against the claimant. The paper had not sought to justify the claims, relying on . .
Cited – Greene v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant appealed against refusal of an order restraining publication by the respondent of an article about her. She said that it was based upon an email falsely attributed to her.
Held: ‘in an action for defamation a court will not impose . .
Cited – Re Angela Roddy (a child) (identification: restriction on publication), Torbay Borough Council v News Group Newspapers FD 2-Dec-2003
A twelve year old girl had become pregnant. The Catholic Church was said to have paid her not to have an abortion. After the birth she and her baby were taken into care. The authority proposed the adoption of the baby. There was more publicity. . .
Cited – Doorson v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Mar-1996
Evidence was given in criminal trials by anonymous witnesses and evidence was also read as a result of a witness having appeared at the trial but then absconded. The defendant was convicted of drug trafficking. As regards the anonymous witnesses, . .
Cited – Z v Finland ECHR 25-Feb-1997
A defendant had appealed against his conviction for manslaughter and related offences by deliberately subjecting women to the risk of being infected by him with HIV virus. The applicant, Z, had been married to the defendant, and infected by him with . .
Cited – A Health Authority v Dr X and Others CA 21-Dec-2001
Where, after a children case has been heard, a party wishes to apply for the release of papers, the application should be made before the judge who had heard the case. To do otherwise left the second judge making a difficult assessment with . .
Cited – A Health Authority v X (Discovery: Medical Conduct) FD 2001
There is a compelling public interest in authorising the disclosure of documents to the General Medical Council if they ‘are or may be relevant to the General Medical Council carrying out its statutory duties to protect the public against possible . .

Cited by:

See also – Doctor A and Others v Ward and Another FD 8-Jan-2010
Parents wished to publicise the way care proceedings had been handled, naming the doctors, social workers and experts some of whom had been criticised. Their names had been shown as initials so far, and interim contra mundum orders had been made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media, Local Government

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.253470