Tag: Children

Taylor (A Child Proceeding By his Mother and Litigation Friend C M Taylor) v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police: CA 6 Jul 2004

The Chief Constable appealed aganst a finding that his officers had wrongfully arrested and imprisoned the claimant. The claimant was 10 years old when arrested, and complained that the officers had not properly advised him of the nature and purpose of the arrest.
Held: ‘The question is thus whether, having regard to all the circumstances of the particular case, the person arrested was told in simple, non-technical language that he could understand, the essential legal and factual grounds for his arrest.’ The cases are fact sensitive. The claimant was told he was being arrested for a violent disorder on an identified previous occasion. To ask the officer to go further would invite even more doubt. As to the period of detention, the judge was entitled to find on the evidence that the delay in interview had been unreasonable.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Sedley Vice-Chancellor, The Vice-Chancellor

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 858, Times 13-Jul-2004, [2004] 3 All ER 503, [2004] 1 WLR 3155

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Christie v Leachinsky HL 25-Mar-1947
Arrested Person must be told basis of the Arrest
Police officers appealed against a finding of false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been arrested under the 1921 Act, but this provided no power of arrest (which the appellant knew). The officers might lawfully have arrested the plaintiff for the . .
Cited – Murphy v Oxford CA 15-Feb-1985
. .
Cited – Abbassy v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 28-Jul-1989
The court considered what information had to be given to a suspect on his arrest.
Held: The question whether or not the information given is adequate has to be assessed objectively having regard to the information which is reasonably available . .
Cited – Mercer v Chief Constable of Lancashire CA 1991
When justifying a detention, the Chief Constable must prove it ‘was lawful minute by minute and hour by hour’. . .
Cited – Fox, Campbell and Hartley v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Aug-1990
The court considered the required basis for a reasonable suspicion to found an arrest without a warrant: ‘The ‘reasonableness’ of the suspicion on which an arrest must be based forms an essential part of the safeguard against arbitrary arrest and . .
Cited – Wilding v Chief Constable of Lancashire CA 22-May-1995
The court considered a claim by a woman for wrongful arrest and unlawful detention by police officers who had reasonably suspected her of burglary of the house of her former partner. In interview by the police, she denied the offence and made . .
Cited – Woods v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 26-May-1995
The court in considering the period of detention of the claimant, asked itself whether the circumstances were such that the decision of the custody sergeant was unreasonable in the sense that no custody sergeant, applying common sense to the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Sher and Others v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Others Admn 21-Jul-2010
The claimants, Pakistani students in the UK on student visas, had been arrested and held by the defendants under the 2000 Act before being released 13 days later without charge. They were at first held incognito. They said that their arrest and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other, Children

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198601

Morris, Regina (on the Application Of) v Westminster City Council,: Admn 26 May 2004

Judges:

Keith J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1199 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Morris, Regina (on the Application of) v Westminster City Council Admn 13-Oct-2003
. .
See Also – Morris, Regina (on the Application of) v Westminster City Council and Another Admn 7-Oct-2004
The applicant questioned the compatibility of s185 of the 1996 Act with Human Rights law. The family sought emergency housing. The child of the family, found to be in priority housing need, was subject also to immigration control. Though the matter . .

Cited by:

See Also – Morris, Regina (on the Application of) v Westminster City Council Admn 13-Oct-2003
. .
See Also – Morris, Regina (on the Application of) v Westminster City Council and Another Admn 7-Oct-2004
The applicant questioned the compatibility of s185 of the 1996 Act with Human Rights law. The family sought emergency housing. The child of the family, found to be in priority housing need, was subject also to immigration control. Though the matter . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Immigration, Children

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198219

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 proceedings
‘the mutual enjoyment by parent and child of each other’s company constitutes a fundamental element of family life, even if the relationship between the parents has broken down, and domestic measures hindering such enjoyment amount to an interference with the right protected by Article 8 of the Convention.’ and ‘In examining whether the non-enforcement of the access arrangements amounted to a lack of respect for the applicant’s family life the Court must strike a balance between the various interests involved, namely the interests of the applicant’s daughter, those of the applicant herself and the general interest in ensuring respect for the rule of law.’

Citations:

60457/00, [2004] 1 FCR 427, [2004] ECHR 58

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.193564

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.

Judges:

Mr Justice Wall

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 142 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 D v D (Children) (Shared Residence Orders) CA 20-Nov-2000
Three children, after their parents’ separation, spent substantial amounts of time with each, despite the acrimony between their parents and frequent court applications. The father argued that without a shared residence order he was treated as a . .
Cited – Re A (Children) (Shared Residence) CA 2002
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.
Cited – Re F (Shared Residence Order) CA 2003
A shared residence order had been made for two small children, even though the parents lived a considerable distance apart.
Held: The decision was correct. The distance did not prevent dividing the children’s year between the two homes. A . .
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 – Re P (Section 91(14) Guidelines) CA 1999
. .

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.192628

In re S (A Child: Abduction): CA 27 Nov 2002

M’s appeal from refusal of order for return of a child under the Hague Convention.

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Scott Baker, Munby JJ

Citations:

[2003] 1 FCR 235, [2003] 1 FLR 1008, [2003] Fam Law 298, [2002] EWCA Civ 1941

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

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188973

Glasgow City Council v DH and Another: IHCS 17 Jul 2003

Exclusion orders had been sought under the Act, but refused for non-compliance with procedures under the Act. New applications were made to different courts, and the applicant said it was not open to the Authorities to make the same application again after it had been once refused.
Held: The procedure did not allow an appeal. In the circumstances, the renewed applications were not an abuse of process. An order is not concerned with achieving a permanent determination of rights and duties but with securing the protection of vulnerable persons in the light of information and advice which may change from time to time. Furthermore, the existence of time-limits for such orders, including at an interim stage, may make it difficult, if not impossible, for the same application to be kept in being until its final determination. Hence the need for a fresh application, which may or may not include additional supporting material.

Judges:

Lord President Lady Cosgrove Lord Cameron of Lochbroom

Citations:

[2003] ScotCS 202, 2003 SCLR 742

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children (Scotland) Act 1995 76 77 78 79 80

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – Magistrates of Portobello v Magistrates of Edinburgh 1882
‘where a well-known and recognised jurisdiction is invoked by the Legislature for the purpose of carrying out a series of provisions which are important for the public without any specific form of process being prescribed, the presumption is that . .
Cited – Harper v Inspector of Rutherglen 1903
Lord Trayner said: ‘Every judgment of an inferior Court is subject to review, unless such review is excluded expressly or by necessary implication’. . .
Cited – Allan and Sons Bill Posting Limited v Edinburgh Magistrates 1909
In asking whether an appeal was available, the presence or absence of a record of the decision at first instance is an indicator, since an appeal is more difficult without. . .
Cited – Allan and Sons Bill Posting Limited v Edinburgh Magistrates 1909
In asking whether an appeal was available, the presence or absence of a record of the decision at first instance is an indicator, since an appeal is more difficult without. . .
Cited – Central Regional Council v B 1985
In the absence of any specific provision forbidding or restricting appeals, the presumption was that the ordinary rules applied in respect of a summary application. Since those rules allowed appeals, the plea to the competency of an appeal from the . .
Cited – Roberton v Roberton 1999
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184669

Re R (A Child): CA 19 Feb 2003

Judges:

The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Dyson Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 182

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – AHE Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v A and Others (By Their Litigation Friend, the Official Solicitor), The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority B, B QBD 26-Feb-2003
An IVF treatment centre used sperm from one couple to fertilise eggs from another. This was discovered, and the unwilling donors sought a paternity declaration.
Held: Section 28 did not confer paternity. The mistake vitiated whatever consents . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179580

P, C And S v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jul 2002

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.

Judges:

Costa, Baka, Bratza, Jorundsson, Loucaides, Birsan and Ugrekhelidze, Early

Citations:

Times 16-Aug-2002, 56547/00, [2002] ECHR 599, (2002) 35 EHRR 1075, [2002] ECHR 604

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Family

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174384

Josu Miguel Dyaz Garcya v European Parliament: ECFI 18 Dec 1992

ECJ 1. Under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, the treatment, as a dependent child, of a person whom an official has a legal responsibility to maintain and whose maintenance involves heavy expenditure constitutes an exceptional step. The condition that the official must have a legal responsibility to maintain a person other than a dependent child must for that reason be interpreted strictly. The concept of ‘a legal responsibility to maintain’ used in the Staff Regulations is derived from the legal systems of the Member States, which, under their laws, impose a mutual responsibility to provide maintenance on relatives by blood and/or marriage of a greater or lesser degree of proximity. That concept must therefore be understood as referring exclusively to an obligation maintenance imposed on an official by a source of law independent of the will of the parties and as excluding maintenance obligations of a contractual, moral or compensatory nature. Since neither Community law nor the Staff Regulations provide the Community court with any guide as to how it should define, by way of independent interpretation, the meaning and scope of a legal responsibility to maintain, entitling an official to receive a dependent child allowance under Article 2(4) of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations, it is necessary to determine whether the national legal system to which the official in question is subject imposes such a legal responsibility on the official. 2. The terms of a provision of Community law which makes no express reference to the laws of the Member States for the purpose of determining its meaning and scope must normally be given an independent interpretation, which must take into account the context of the provision and the purpose of the relevant regulations. In the absence of an express reference to the laws of the Member States, the application of Community law may sometimes necessitate a reference to the laws of the Member States where the Community court cannot identify in Community law or in the general principles of Community law criteria enabling it to define the meaning and scope of such a provision by way of independent interpretation. 3. An official has no legitimate interest in the annulment of a decision for breach of procedural requirements where the administration has no scope for the exercise of discretion but is bound to act as it has done. In such a case, the annulment of the contested decision could lead only to the adoption of another decision identical in substance to the decision annulled.

Citations:

T-43/90, [1992] EUECJ T-43/90

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Children, Benefits

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172447

L v Finland: ECHR 27 Apr 2000

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 13; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings
‘the consideration of what is in the best interests of the child is of crucial importance.’

Judges:

Mr G. Ress

Citations:

[2000] ECHR 175, 25651/94, [2000] ECHR 176, [2000] 2 FLR 118, [2000] Fam Law 536, (2001) 31 EHRR 30, [2000] 3 FCR 219, 31 EHRR 30

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

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: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165861

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 adoption of measures designed to secure respect for family life even in the sphere of relations between individuals, including both the provision of a regulatory framework of adjudicatory and enforcement machinery protecting individuals’ rights and the implementation, where appropriate, of specific steps. In both the negative and positive contexts, regard must be had to the fair balance which has to be struck between the competing interests of the individual and the community, including other concerned third parties, and the state’s margin of appreciation.’ Speed was essential in determining disputes about children.

Citations:

32346/96, (2001) 33 EHRR I, [2001] 1 FLR 153, [2000] ECHR 419, [2000] 3 FCR 193, 2001 Fam LR 103, [2000] Fam Law 880

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark CA 16-Oct-2003
The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the . .
Mentioned – 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 . .
Cited – Van Colle v Hertfordshire Police QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimants claimed for the estate of their murdered son. He had been waiting to give evidence in a criminal trial, and had asked the police for support having received threats. Other witnesses had also suffered intimidation including acts of . .
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: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165932

Mazurek v France: ECHR 1 Feb 2000

ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 14+P1-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+8; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

34406/97, [2000] ECHR 48, (2006) 42 EHRR 9

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Hand and Another v George ChD 17-Mar-2017
Adopted grandchildren entitled to succession
The court was asked whether the adopted children whose adopting father, the son of the testator, were grandchildren of the testator for the purposes of his will.
Held: The claim succeeded. The defendants, the other beneficiaries were not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Wills and Probate

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165807

Re B (A Child): CA 18 Oct 2017

The court heard a case in which in the course of a child residence dispute F had made and sought to have use before the court, covert recordings of interviews and telephone conversations with practitioners.
Held: The actual matters had been decided adequately without the recordings, but the court acknowledged both the difficulties arising and the absence of authority, and said that an initation would be made to the Family Justice Council to consider the issue.

Judges:

Sir James Munby P FD, King LJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1579

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Evidence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.597402

Re: CB and JB (care proceedings: guidelines): FD 8 Apr 1998

The court gave guidelines for procedures at preliminary hearings in care cases, and as to psychiatric evidence: ‘(iv) Evidence of propensity or psychiatric or psychological assessment of one of the parties is unlikely to be of any assistance in resolving a purely factual issue. There will in any event be before the court evidence from the Local Authority and the parents relating to the history of the case and the backgrounds of each of the parents. A psychologist or psychiatrist instructed to undertake an assessment of a parent for the first stage of a split hearing is unlikely to have a complete knowledge of the facts.
(vi) Furthermore, such a witness may, as here, express opinions as to propensity or as to responsibility for a child’s injuries which are both prejudicial and wrong. The assessment of adult credibility as to the responsibility for a child’s injuries (often the critical factual issue) remains the function of the judge. In my judgment, therefore, a psychiatric or psychological assessment of the parties should not be permitted at the first stage of a split trial unless the particular facts of the case demonstrate that such evidence is or is likely to be directly relevant to the factual issue to be tried.’

Judges:

Wall J

Citations:

[1998] 2 FLR 211, [1998] EWHC Fam 2000

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re LU (A Child); In re LB (A Child) (Serious Injury: Standard of Proof); re U (A Child) (Department for Education and Skills intervening) CA 14-May-2004
In each case, the other parent appealed care orders where she had been found to have injured her children. In each case the sole evidence was the injury to the child’s health and expert medical evidence. The cases were referred following the . .
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: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.196919

In Re D (Minors) (Adoption Reports: Confidentiality): CA 8 Dec 1994

A guardian ad litem’s promise of confidentiality to a child can broken by a court, and the guardian must be careful in making such promises.

Citations:

Times 08-Dec-1994

Statutes:

Adoption Rules 1984 53(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Re D (Minors) (Adoption Reports: Confidentiality) HL 1-Sep-1995
The House considered whether it was right for a tribunal to see and rely upon papers not disclosed to the parties. Lord Mustill said: ‘a first principle of fairness that each party to a judicial process shall have an opportunity to answer by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Adoption

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.81831

Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte Caddell: Admn 9 Jun 1997

When a child in care attains the age of eighteen, the local authority in whose care the child was before attaining that age, is the one who must provide continuing advice and support.

Citations:

Times 30-Jun-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 535, [1998] 1 FLR 253, [1998] Fam Law 20, [1998] 2 FCR 6

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 24(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Stewart) v Wandsworth London Borough Council and Others QBD 17-Sep-2001
The words ‘within their area’ in the section had to be read consistently with other parts of the Act, and therefore, the duty to carry out an assessment if a child had a physical connection with the area. A temporary housing in a homeless hostel . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Local Government

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.137480

In Re S (A Minor) (Child Abduction: Delay): FD 12 Nov 1997

A summary order for the return of an abducted child is not appropriate where there had been some considerable and unexplained delay in the making of the application for the return of the child.

Citations:

Times 20-Nov-1997, Gazette 12-Nov-1997

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980, Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.82168

M v M: FD 8 Oct 1990

Judges:

Butler-Sloss P

Citations:

Unreported, 8 October 1990

Statutes:

Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re N (Minors) (Abduction) FD 2-Jan-1991
The court considered the degree of settlement that had to be proved under the Act: ‘The second question which has arisen is: what is the degree of settlement which has to be demonstrated? There is some force, I find, in the argument that legal . .
Cited – Cannon v Cannon CA 19-Oct-2004
The mother had brought the child to the UK wrongfully. She had hidden their identity for more than a year. Upon discovering her, the father came to England and began proceedings for the child’s return to the US.
Held: Because the child’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.219120

TN v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 16 Dec 2011

‘The claimant, an unaccompanied child, challenges the Secretary of State’s decision of 12 November 2010 refusing his claim for asylum and for humanitarian protection and granting him discretionary leave to remain in the United Kingdom for a shorter period than would enable him to appeal against that decision to the First-tier Tribunal. ‘

Judges:

Lindblom J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 3296 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – TN (Afghanistan) and Another v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 12-Dec-2013
The applicants had arrived in the UK as minors fleeing Afghanistan. They now challenged grant of a discretionary leave to remain limited to expire withiin one year. . .
At first instance – TN, MA and AA (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 24-Jun-2015
The appellants, children from Afghanistan whose asylum claims had been rejected, challenged the sufficiency of the appellate process, and the respondents obligations for family tracing.
Held: The appeals failed. An applicant could not claim, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Children

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.459744

Re B: CA 25 Jul 1994

Court must release immediately person from ‘seek and find’ order unless contempt is alleged and shown.

Citations:

Ind Summary 25-Jul-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.85717

Sheffield City Council v V; Legal Services Commission intervening: FD 23 Jun 2006

The court set out the criteria to be used when ordering payment by the council of the costs of a residential assessment ordered during care proceedings.

Citations:

Times 25-Aug-2006

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Local Government, Legal Aid

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.244693

Regina (S) v Swindon Borough Council and Another: QBD 27 Jun 2001

When considering the need for measures to protect a child, the local authority did not first require evidence to a standard which would satisfy a court even on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities. At the later stage where decisions might be taken by a court was the time when standards of evidence came to be applied. When deciding to begin an investigation, the words of the statute were enough. They had only to have reasonable cause to suspect that a child might suffer harm.

Citations:

Times 27-Jun-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 334

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 47

Children, Local Government

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86003

In Re W (A Child); In Re A (A Child); In Re B (Children): CA 5 Aug 1999

Where either a child had been registered with his father’s name, or his parents had been married, there would need to be strong reasons for allowing a change of surname. Where the parents were not married, the degree of commitment shown by the father to the child, the quality of contact and the presence or otherwise of parental responsibility were proper factors to be taken into account.
Lady Justice Butler-Sloss: ‘The present position, in summary, would appear to be as follows:-
a. If parents are married they both have the power and the duty to register their child’s names.
b. If they are not married the mother has the sole duty and power to do so.
c. After registration of the child’s names, the grant of a residence order obliges any person wishing to change the surname to obtain the leave of the court or the written consent of all those who have parental responsibility.
d. In the absence of a residence order, the person wishing to change the surname from the registered name ought to obtain the relevant written consent or the leave of the court by making an application for a specific issue order.
e. On any application the welfare of the child is paramount and the judge must have regard to the section 1 (3) criteria.
f. Among the factors to which the court should have regard is the registered surname of the child and the reasons for the registration, for instance recognition of the biological link with the child’s father. Registration is always a relevant and an important consideration but it is not in itself decisive. The weight to be given to it by the court will depend upon the other relevant factors or valid countervailing reasons which may tip the balance the other way.
g. The relevant considerations should include factors which may arise in the future as well as the present situation.
h. Reasons given for changing or seeking to change a child’s name based on the fact that the child’s name is or is not the same as the parent making the application do not generally carry much weight.
i. The reasons for an earlier unilateral decision to change a child’s name may be relevant.
j. Any changes of circumstances of the child since the original registration may be relevant.
k. In the case of a child whose parents were married to each, the fact of the marriage is important and I would suggest that there would have to be strong reasons to change the name from the father’s surname if the child was so registered.
l. Where the child’s parents were not married to each other, the mother has control over registration. Consequently on an application to change the surname of the child, the degree of commitment of the father to the child, the quality of contact, if it occurs, between father and child, the existence or absence of parental responsibility are all relevant factors to take into account. ‘

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ, Auld LJ, Mantell LJ

Citations:

Gazette 02-Sep-1999, Times 05-Aug-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 2030

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953, Registration of Births and Deaths Regulations 1987

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dawson v Wearmouth CA 31-Jul-1997
The father was not married to the mother who, without consulting the father, registered the child in the name of her former husband by whom she had previously had two children. The father sought various orders under the Children Act, including a . .
Cited – Dawson v Wearmouth HL 4-Feb-1999
The parents were unmarried. The mother had registered the child under her former partner’s surname. The father sought an order that his name be used instead. The mother’s apeal against an order to that effect had succeeded.
Held: The father’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82262

E v Legal Aid Board, Ex P W et Al (Minors): QBD 25 Nov 1999

The legal aid board could refuse to grant legal aid to children involved in proceedings to refuse contact to a parent, because the regulations which applied were sufficiently widely drawn to allow a discretion to the local authority to pay the costs. In such circumstances it was not unreasonable for legal aid to be refused.

Citations:

Times 25-Nov-1999

Statutes:

Guardians ad Litem Reporting Officers (Panels) Regulations 1991 (1991 No 205) 9, Children Act 1989 41(9), Family Proceedings Rules 1991 (1991 No 1247) 4.23

Legal Aid, Children, Local Government

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80202

Dorney-Kingdom v Dorney-Kingdom: CA 25 Jul 2000

A court may not make an original order for child maintenance, save by consent. The practice of disguising such an order, as part of spousal maintenance, pending a determination by the Child Support Agency, was only legitimate where there was included a real element of spousal maintenance. Simply calling child maintenance spousal maintenance is not correct or legitimate.

Citations:

Times 25-Jul-2000, Gazette 27-Jul-2000

Statutes:

Child Support Act 1991 8(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Family, Child Support

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80101

C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 30 Mar 1994

The 12 year old defendant held the handlebars of a motorcycle allowing a second boy to try to remove the chain and padlock securing it. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: The presumption of doli incapax for a 10-14 year old child is no longer good law. Laws J said: ‘Whatever may have been the position in an earlier age, when there was no system of universal compulsory education and when, perhaps, children did not grow up as quickly as they do nowadays, this presumption at the present time is a serious disservice to our law. It means that a child over ten who commits an act of obvious dishonesty, or even grave violence, is to be acquitted unless the prosecution specifically prove by discrete evidence that he understands the obliquity of what he is doing. It is unreal and contrary to common sense;’ and ‘Even that is not the end of it. The rule is divisive and perverse: divisive, because it tends to attach criminal consequences to the acts of children coming from what used to be called good homes more readily than to the acts of others; perverse, because it tends to absolve from criminal responsibility the very children most likely to commit criminal acts. It must surely nowadays be regarded as obvious that, where a morally impoverished upbringing may have led a teenager into crime, the facts of his background should go not to his guilt, but to his mitigation; the very emphasis placed in modern penal policy upon the desirability of non-custodial disposals designed to be remedial rather than retributive – especially in the case of young offenders – offers powerful support for the view that delinquents under the age of 14, who may know no better than to commit antisocial and sometimes dangerous crimes, should not be held immune from the criminal justice system, but sensibly managed within it. Otherwise they are left outside the law, free to commit further crime, perhaps of increasing gravity, unchecked by the courts whose very duty it is to bring them to book.’ and ‘the presumption is in principle objectionable. It is no part of the general law that a defendant should be proved to appreciate that his act is ‘seriously wrong.’ He may even think his crime to be justified; in the ordinary way no such consideration can be prayed in aid in his favour. Yet in a case where the presumption applies, an additional requirement, not insisted upon in the case of an adult, is imposed as a condition of guilt, namely a specific understanding in the mind of the child that his act is seriously wrong. This is out of step with the general law.’

Judges:

Laws J

Citations:

Times 30-Mar-1994, [1995] 1 Cr App R 118

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, Ex Parte C QBD 7-Mar-1994
The doli incapax assumption that a child does not have a guilty mind, is no longer an appropriate presumption for a 12 year old youth. A prosecutor must act in accordance with the guidelines issued pursuant to the Act. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 17-Mar-1995
The House considered whether the long established rule of the criminal law presuming that a child did not have a guilty mind should be set aside.
Held: Doli incapax, the presumption of a child’s lack of mens rea, is still effective and good . .
Cited – Regina v T CACD 16-Apr-2008
The twelve year old defendant had pleaded guilty to several allegations of sexual assault. The judge had ruled that it was not open to him to plead doli incapax. He appealed saying that only the presumption of doli incapax had been abolished, and . .
Cited – JTB, Regina v HL 29-Apr-2009
The defendant appealed against his convictions for sexual assaults. He was aged twelve at the time of the offences, but had been prevented from arguing that he had not known that what he was doing was wrong. The House was asked whether the effect of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Children

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78795

Birmingham City Council v H (A Minor) and Others: HL 16 Dec 1993

The local authority applied for a care order in respect of a young baby. The mother was only 15 and was a ‘child’ herself.
Held: In an application under 34(4) the interests of the child who is the subject of the application are paramount, and precede those of the mother, even if she herself is a child. Section 34(3) enabled the court to ‘make such order as it considers appropriate with respect to the contact which is to be allowed between the child and that person’. Lord Slynn of Hadley: ‘For this purpose, ‘the child’ is the child in care in respect of whom an order is sought by one of the four categories of person. That child is the subject matter of the application. The question to be determined relates to that child’s upbringing and it is that child’s welfare which must be the court’s paramount consideration. The fact that the parent is also a child does not mean that both parent’s and child’s welfare is paramount and that each has to be balanced against the other.’

Judges:

Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Slynn, Lord Hadley, Lord Woolf

Citations:

Independent 07-Jan-1994, Gazette 09-Feb-1994, Times 17-Dec-1993, [1993] UKHL 9

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 34(4)

Citing:

Appeal from – Birmingham City Council v H (A Minor) CA 1993
An application was made by the local authority to take into care the daughter of a 15 year old mother. The question was whether any priority was to be given to the daughter’s interests when the mother herself was also a child.
Held: When the . .

Cited by:

Cited – In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
Appealed to – Birmingham City Council v H (A Minor) CA 1993
An application was made by the local authority to take into care the daughter of a 15 year old mother. The question was whether any priority was to be given to the daughter’s interests when the mother herself was also a child.
Held: When the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78416

In Re AR (An Order Under The Child Abduction And Custody Act 1985): SCS 17 Jun 2014

The two girls were with their mother in Scotland. The father, living in France, sought their return to France:
Held: The court granted the father’s application. The Lord Ordinary: ‘After considering all the relevant evidence I am satisfied that the children had not immediately before 20 November 2013 lost their habitual residence in France. They had both been born there and lived there in family with their parents until 26 July. This was a French family living in France. There is nothing which happened thereafter which persuades me that they had ceased to be habitually resident in France. I conclude from the evidence and productions presented that the stay of the respondent and the two children in Scotland was to be of limited duration, consisting of the period of her maternity leave. I do not regard the sale of the family home in Narbonne as evidencing a joint intention to leave France for good. I am not persuaded that there was a joint decision to uproot themselves from France and relocate permanently to Scotland. The petitioner has his own expanding business in Narbonne, for which he relies on his livelihood (sic) and in order to maintain the respondent and children. He speaks little or no English. I reject as fanciful any suggestion that he intended to set up a business in Scotland. That would have involved abandoning his established business in France and attempting to set up a business in a country where he did not speak the language and had no obvious prospect of succeeding. He continued to live and work in France after the respondent and children came to live in Scotland, although he visited them regularly. The respondent and children returned to France on two occasions after their move to Scotland. Certain of the children’s belongings were in storage in France. The lease of the property in which the respondent and children were living in Scotland was in her name alone. Nothing in the communications between the parties indicates a joint intention to uproot themselves from France and relocate permanently to Scotland.’

Citations:

Unreported, 17 June 2014

Statutes:

Child Abduction And Custody Act 1985

Cited by:

Appeal from – AR, Re An Order Under The Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 SCS 14-Nov-2014
(Extra Division, Inner House – Opinion of Lord Malcolm) – appeal in application for order of return of two children to their father in France. The partis disputed whether Scotland had become habitually resident in Scotland, and also whether the . .
At Outer House – AR v RN (Scotland) SC 22-May-2015
The court was asked whether it should order the return to France of two little girls who have been living with their mother in Scotland since July 2013. The issue arose under article 3 of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Scotland

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.566222

Case XLVI 29 Ass Pl 35 29 E 3, 37: 1220

A. has judgment against B. in ravishment of ward ; B brings a writ of error, and assigns for error, that the plaintiff below did riot shew in his count, that he had seised the ward. Non allocatur; for it vests in him by the death of the ancestor, for it is a thing transitory.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 371, (1220-1623) Jenk 24, (1220) 145 ER 18 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Children

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.461283

35 H 6, 52 28 H 8 Br Livery, 55 Br Cases, 187, 78, 113, 114 12 H 4, 18 Stamf Praer 10 Dally, 90, Pl 8 Co Lit 77 A F N B 258, 256 Gard, Livery, Charrel Br Cases, 322 By 12 C 2, Ch 24, These Tenures And Services Are Abolish’D: 1220

No livery shall be sued by any heir, if the tenure be not of the King by knight’s service in capite, or in socage in capite, if the heir be of full age at the time of the death of his father, he shall pay half a year’s value of the land : if the tenure be socage in capite, such heir shall pay relief: if he be fourteen years of age at the time of the death of his ancestor, he shall pay nothing. Where the King has a ward, because of another ward who is the King’s tenant in capite by knight’s service ; and the ward because of ward comes first to full age, he shall sue his livery ; but not where his guardiian has sued his livery before him : but though his guardian has sued his livery before him, yet the King shall retain the land and body of the ward because of ward till his full age. So shall every other lord do who has a ward because of ward ; if he has not the seigniory by a defeasible title : if so, the entry of him who has right shall avoid it : so of a mortgage redeemed, and a seigniory granted upon condition. The heir of the King’s tenant by knight’s service, not in capite, at his full age, after he has paid relief, shall have an ouster le maine. The King’s tenant of lands within the Dutchy of Lancaster shall sue livery, but not for lands held of the dutchy, and lying out of the dutchy. 21 E. 4, 60. 26 H. 8.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 445, (1220-1623) Jenk 113, (1220) 145 ER 80 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Children, Land

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.461357

In Re N (Leave to withdraw care proceedings): 2000

Citations:

[2000] 1 FCR 258

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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.

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.417809

Moodey v Field: CA 13 Feb 1981

The mother appealed against refusal of permission to remove the child from the jurisdiction.
Held: Ormrod LJ summarised the situation: ‘the question therefore in each case is, is the proposed move a reasonable one from the point of view of the adults involved? If the answer is yes, then leave should only be refused if it is clearly shown beyond any doubt that the interests of the children and the interests of the custodial parent are incompatible. One might postulate a situation where a boy or girl is well settled in a boarding school, or something of that kind, and it could be said to be very disadvantageous to upset the situation and move the child into a very different educational system. I merely take that as an example. Short of something like that, the court in principle should not interfere with the reasonable decision of the custodial parent.’

Judges:

Ormrod LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 13 February 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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.

Children

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.417810

Edwards v Carter: HL 1893

If an infant choses to repudiate a disposition, he must do so within a reasonable time after coming of age.

Citations:

[1893] AC 361

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Fisher v Brooker and Others HL 30-Jul-2009
The claimant sought a share in the royalties from the song ‘A whiter shade of pale’ but had delayed his claim for 38 years. He had contributed the organ solo which had contributed significantly to the song’s success. He now sought a share of future . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Contract

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.373857

In re McGrath (Infants): CA 1893

Judges:

Lindley LJ

Citations:

[1893] 1 Ch 143

Cited by:

Cited – In re PS (an Adult), Re; City of Sunderland v PS by her litigation friend the Offcial Solcicitor and CA; Re PS (Incapacitated or Vulnerable Adult) FD 9-Mar-2007
The patient an elderly lady with limited mental capacity was to be returned from hospital, but her daughter said she was to come home. The local authority sought to prevent this, wanting to return her to a residential unit where she had lived for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.269964

Kelly v Monklands District Council: 1986

A local authority’s housing duties may be owed to a child if that child is living independently of its parents.

Citations:

1986 SLT 169

Cited by:

Cited – Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames v Prince and Another CA 2-Dec-1998
The Borough’s tenant had died. His wife and daughter had lived with him, but the mother not for long enough to succeed to his tenancy. The daughter (aged thirteen) claimed to have done so having lived with him for three years.
Held: The 1985 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Housing, Children, Local Government

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.259630

Poel v Poel: CA 1970

The mother of a child of two and a half had obtained a custody order with weekly access given to the father. She wished to emigrate with her new husband and the expected child of that marriage to New Zealand. She applied to remove the child permanently from the jurisdiction. If they were not allowed to take the child with them they were prepared to give up their plans to emigrate. The county court judge refused the application.
Held: The appeal succeeded.
Winn LJ said: ‘I am very firmly of opinion that the child`s happiness is directly dependent not only upon the health and happiness of his own mother but upon her freedom from the very likely repercussions of an adverse character, which would result affecting her relations with her new husband and her ability to look after her family peacefully and in a psychological frame of ease, from the refusal of the permission to take this boy to New Zealand which I think quite clearly his welfare dictates.’
Sachs LJ said: ‘When a marriage breaks up, then a situation normally arises when the child of that marriage, instead of being in the joint custody of both parents, must of necessity become one who is in the custody of a single parent. Once that position has arisen and the custody is working well, this court should not lightly interfere with such reasonable way of life as is selected by that parent to whom custody has been rightly given. Any such interference may, as Winn LJ has pointed out, produce considerable strains which would be unfair not only to the parent whose way of life is interfered with but also to any new marriage of that parent. In that way it might well in due course reflect on the welfare of the child. The way in which the parent who properly has custody of a child may choose in a reasonable manner to order his or her way of life is one of those things which the parent who has not been given custody may well have to bear, even though one has every sympathy with the latter on some of the results.’

Judges:

Sachs LJ, Winn LJ

Citations:

[1970] 1 WLR 1469

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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.
Cited – In re AR (A Child: Relocation) FD 10-Jun-2010
Both parents had parental responsibility. The French mother wished to return to live in France and to take the five year old child with her, applying to court for the appropriate order.
Held: The court pointed to the real difficulties always . .
Cited – A v A CA 1979
The mother had been given leave to take the child of the family out of the jurisdiction. The father sought leave to appeal.
Held: Ormrod LJ said: ‘It is always difficult in these cases when marriages break up where a wife who, as this one is, . .
Cited – Chamberlain v de la Mare CA 1983
The mother wanted to take the two infant children to New York with her new husband. The father resisted. At first instance, Balcombe J had considered both Poel and Nash, but said that without wishing to be an iconoclast, he would simply apply the . .
Cited – Lonslow v Hennig CA 1986
The mother sought leave to remove the children of the family against the father’s wishes. She wanted to move to New Zealand. The judge at first instance had refused her application. She appealed.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Though the first . .
Confirmed – In re H (application to remove from jurisdiction) FD 1998
The mother had remarried and now wished to move to the United States with her new husband, an American. The father had played an unusually large role in caring for the child as a baby and continued to keep closely in touch with her. The judge said . .
Cited – In Re C (leave to remove from the jurisdiction) CA 2000
The court heard an appeal from an order made on an application for leave to remove a child from the jurisdiction. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.260328

Re D (Contact and Parental Responsibility: Lesbian Mothers and Known Father): 2006

Citations:

[2006] 1 FCR 556

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.244492

Hodak v Newman and Hodak: 1993

(Family Court of Australia) Lindenburgh J said: ‘I am of the opinion that the fact of parenthood is to be regarded as an important and significant factor in considering which proposals better advance the welfare of the child. Such fact does not, however, establish a presumption in favour of the natural parent, nor generate a preferential position in favour of the natural parent from which the Court commences its decision-making process . . Each case should be determined upon an examination of its own merits and of the individuals there involved.’

Judges:

Lindenmayer J

Citations:

(1993) 17 Fam LR 1, [1993] FamCA 83, (1993) FLC 92-421

Links:

Austlii

Cited by:

Approved – Rice v Miller 10-Sep-1993
(Family Court of Australia) Whilst there is a legislative presumption regarding equal shared parental responsibility between parents there is no presumption in favour of parents (jointly or severally) as regards the placement of children nor a . .
Approved – Re Evelyn CA 1998
. .
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, Commonwealth

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.244487

Re L (Abduction: Pending Criminal Proceedings): FD 1999

In a child abduction case, the court considered whether a child was settled within the UK if his whereabouts had been hidden: ‘The mother might or might not have demonstrated that the children were now settled in their new environment. The proposition is harder to demonstrate than at first appears. In Re S (A Minor) (Abduction) [1992] 2 FLR 1, 24C, Purchas LJ described what was required as a long-term settled position; and in Re N (Minors) (Abduction) [1991] 1 FLR 413, 418C, Bracewell J observed that the position had to be as permanent as anything in life could be said to be permanent. Whether a Danish mother who has been present with the children in England for a year only because it has been a good hiding-place and who faces likely extradition proceedings could demonstrate the children’s settlement in England within the meaning of those authorities is doubtful.’

Judges:

Wilson J

Citations:

[1999] 1 FLR 433

Citing:

Cited – Re S (A Minor) (Abduction) CA 1991
The court considered what would constitute a child being ‘settled’ under the 1985 Act: ‘I now turn to the last matter, which is art. 12, as to whether in these circumstances it has been demonstrated that Katharine in now settled in her new . .
Cited – Re N (Minors) (Abduction) FD 2-Jan-1991
The court considered the degree of settlement that had to be proved under the Act: ‘The second question which has arisen is: what is the degree of settlement which has to be demonstrated? There is some force, I find, in the argument that legal . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cannon v Cannon CA 19-Oct-2004
The mother had brought the child to the UK wrongfully. She had hidden their identity for more than a year. Upon discovering her, the father came to England and began proceedings for the child’s return to the US.
Held: Because the child’s . .
Cited – Re H (Abduction: Child of Sixteen) FD 2000
The court considered the position as to whether a child was to be deemed to be settled after having been within the UK for a period of more than one year: ‘It is the case, looking at the relative dates, that these proceedings were commenced after . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.219128

In re O (Abduction: Consent and Acquiescence): FD 1997

Judges:

Bennett J

Citations:

[1997] 1 FLR 924

Statutes:

Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 12 13

Citing:

Disappoved – In re C (Abduction: Consent) FD 1996
The Convention specifically placed the issue of consent within article 13. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.200448

A County Council v W and others (Disclosure): FD 1997

In the absence of section 12 it would be contempt to disclose matter before a children’s court to the General Medical Council.

Judges:

Cazalet J

Citations:

[1997] 1 FLR 574

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 12

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.194852

In re de Beaujeu’s Application: ChD 1949

Publication of the content of wardship proceedings, against the direction of the judge prohibiting publication, was a contempt of court. Wynn-Parry J said: ‘In my judgment in proceedings involving wards of court the judge has a complete discretion to allow or forbid publication of the proceedings or any order made therein. In the absence of any special direction, I am of opinion that prima facie it would be a contempt of court to publish an account of proceedings relating to an infant conducted in chambers without the express permission of the judge who heard the case.’

Judges:

Wynn-Parry J

Citations:

[1949] 1 All ER 439, [1949] Ch 230

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.194847

In Re R (Wardship: Restrictions on Publication): CA 1994

The parents had separated and the child made a ward of court. The mother had care and control and the father had access. The father abducted the child to Israel but she was recovered. The father was extradited to stand trial here. He sought publicity for his views upon the treatment of fathers by the family courts. In the Family Division, an order was made prohibiting publicity in very wide terms, which would have precluded virtually any reporting of the criminal proceedings. He appealed.
Held: The order was varied to permit the reporting of the father’s criminal trial. Save by statute reports of proceedings in a court should only be restrained ‘where and to the extent that restraint is shown to be necessary for the purpose of protecting the proper administration of justice’. Although publicity about the ward should be as limited as possible, restraining reports of the criminal trial was not necessary ‘to enable the judge to do justice in the wardship proceedings’. There was no statutory provision automatically restricting reporting, but section 39 did apply to enable the criminal court to prohibit identification of the ward as the victim of the alleged crime. He had ‘the greatest doubt’, about the first instance view on its power to restrain reporting of the criminal trial, but if he had he should have left it to the criminal judge to decide whether to do so.
Millett LJ said that apart from the contempt jurisdiction, ‘the wardship judge has an additional jurisdiction to prohibit the publication of information concerning the ward which is directed at the ward or at those having responsibility for the ward’s upbringing, thereby threatening the effective working of the court’s jurisdiction; . . this last mentioned jurisdiction is of recent origin. Its source and justification lie in the inherent power of the court to protect the integrity of its own process. There is no jurisdiction in the wardship court to protect its wards from adverse publicity which does not threaten the effective working of the court’s jurisdiction merely on the ground that such publicity would be contrary to the interests of the ward or damaging to his welfare’.
He drew a distinction between the inherent jurisdiction and the statutory powers under section 39 which ‘unlike the wardship jurisdiction’ could be used for the sole purpose of protecting children from harmful publicity. The limiting principle of the wardship jurisdiction: ‘may be expressed more generally by saying that the wardship court has no power to exempt its ward from the general law, or to obtain for its ward rights and privileges not generally available to children who are not wards of court; or by saying that the wardship court can seek to achieve for its ward all that wise parents or guardian acting in concert and exclusively in the interests of the child could achieve, but no more . . Nor can it protect the ward from adverse publicity as such.’

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Millett LJ

Citations:

[1994] Fam 254, [1994] 2 FLR 637, [1994] 3 All ER 658, [1994] 3 WLR 36

Statutes:

Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) CA 10-Jul-2003
An order was sought to protect from publicity a child whose mother faced trial for the murder of his brother. The child was now in care.
Held: The court must balance the need to protect the child with the need for freedom of the press. The . .
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 – Kelly (A Minor) v British Broadcasting Corporation FD 25-Jul-2000
K, aged 16, had left home to join what was said to be a religious sect. His whereabouts were unknown. He had been made a ward of court and the Official Solicitor was appointed to represent his interests. He had sent messages to say that he was well . .
Cited – H v A (No2) FD 17-Sep-2015
The court had previously published and then withdrawn its judgment after third parties had been able to identify those involved by pulling together media and internet reports with the judgment.
Held: The judgment case should be published in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.185251

In Re Mohamed Arif (an infant): 1968

The control of the wardship court over the person of its ward is far from absolute. It is ousted in a wide variety of situations in which the law has entrusted such controlled persons other than those having responsibility for the upbringing of the ward. This limiting principle may be expressed more generally by saying that the wardship court has no power to exempt its ward from the general law, or to obtain for its ward rights and privileges not generally available to children who are not wards of court; or by saying that the wardship court can seek to achieve for its ward all that wise parents and guardians acting in concert and exclusively for the interest of the child could achieve, but no more.

Judges:

Russell LJ

Citations:

[1968] Ch 642

Children

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.184569

In re Z (A Minor) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): CA 31 Jul 1995

The court was asked whether the daughter of Cecil Parkinson and Sarah Keays should be permitted to take part in a television programme about the specialist help she was receiving for her special educational needs.
Held: The court refused to vary an injunction against publication of any details with regard to a particular child. This was based on the Court’s parens patriae jurisdiction and was taken not so much for the protection of the administration of justice but in accordance with the Court’s quasi-parental responsibilities in a context where, under the Children Act 1989, the interests of the child were paramount.
In relation to the media the exercise of the court’s inherent parens patriae or wardship jurisdiction is divided into three parts: the first part, in which the jurisdiction is not exercisable at all and the child is left to whatever remedies against the media the law would give an adult in comparable circumstances; a second part in which the jurisdiction is exercisable, but in circumstances where, because the court is exercising only its ‘protective’ jurisdiction, the child’s interests are not paramount and where a so-called balancing exercise has to be performed; and the third part, in which, because the court is exercising its ‘custodial’ jurisdiction, the child’s interests are paramount.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR said: ‘I understood the mother’s counsel to advance two reasons why discretion could only be properly exercised to the effect contended for. The first was that the court should never override the decision of a devoted and responsible parent such as this mother was found to be. I would for my part accept without reservation that the decision of a devoted and responsible parent should be treated with respect. It should certainly not be disregarded or lightly set aside. But the role of the court is to exercise an independent and objective judgment. If that judgment is in accord with that of the devoted and responsible parent, well and good. If it is not, then it is the duty of the court, after giving due weight to the view of the devoted and responsible parent, to give effect to its own judgment. That is what it is there for. Its judgment may of course be wrong. So may that of the parent. But once the jurisdiction of the court is invoked its clear duty is to reach and give the best judgment that it can.’
Ward LJ said that the jurisdiction can be exercised and a parent can be restrained either by an in personam injunction or, where appropriate by a prohibited steps order under section 8 of the 1989 Act. It was not necessary to make the child a ward in order to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the court.

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Ward LJ

Citations:

[1997] Fam 1, [1996] 1 FLR 197, [1996] 2 WLR 88

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Keays v Guardian Newspapers Limited, Alton, Sarler QBD 1-Jul-2003
The claimant asserted defamation by the defendant. The parties sought a decision on whether the article at issue was a comment piece, in which case the defendant could plead fair comment, or one asserting fact, in which case that defence would not . .
Cited – Re S (A Child) CA 10-Jul-2003
The mother of the child on behalf of whom the application was made, was to face trial for murder. The child was in care and an order was sought to restrain publiction of material which might reveal his identity, including matters arising during the . .
Cited – In re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) CA 10-Jul-2003
An order was sought to protect from publicity a child whose mother faced trial for the murder of his brother. The child was now in care.
Held: The court must balance the need to protect the child with the need for freedom of the press. The . .
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 – In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
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 – 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 – 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 – In re A (A Minor) FD 8-Jul-2011
An application was made in care proceedings for an order restricting publication of information about the family after the deaths of two siblings of the child subject to the application. The Sun and a local newspaper had already published stories . .
Cited – Kelly (A Minor) v British Broadcasting Corporation FD 25-Jul-2000
K, aged 16, had left home to join what was said to be a religious sect. His whereabouts were unknown. He had been made a ward of court and the Official Solicitor was appointed to represent his interests. He had sent messages to say that he was well . .
Cited – Jones v Kernott SC 9-Nov-2011
Unmarried Couple – Equal division displaced
The parties were unmarried but had lived together. They now disputed the shares in which they had held the family home. It had been bought in joint names, but after Mr Kernott (K) left in 1993, Ms Jones (J) had made all payments on the house. She . .
Cited – In re T (a Minor) CA 24-Oct-1996
C was born with a liver defect. After a failed operation, the parents, both caring health professionals, decided not to put him through major surgery again. The local authority and doctors obtained an order to allow a potentially life saving liver . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Media

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.184400

Re B (A Child): FD 31 Jul 2014

The child had been taken to Pakistan by one of the now separated parents. Not knowing that P had been so taken, the other mother applied for an order to help her find her, and for contact. Having learnt that the respondent had taken her to Pakistan, the appellant also applied for orders that B should be made a ward of court and be returned to England.
Held: Hogg J dismissed both of the appellant’s applications. It was common ground that the respondent and B had been habitually resident in England. When departing for Pakistan on that date, the respondent had genuinely intended to make a new life for herself and for B there and her motivation had not been to evade the appellant’s increasing demands to be allowed to play a fuller role in B’s life. So Hogg J held that the respondent had lost her own habitual residence in England. She accepted that the appellant had been a significant person in B’s life, particularly prior to the breakdown of the relationship between the two women; that the appellant still had much to offer B; and that B had said that she would miss the appellant and had wished to remain in touch with her. But, asked Hogg J, was B’s wish to remain in touch with the appellant enough to sustain a continuation of her habitual residence in England? Her answer was no.

Judges:

Hogg J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 3017 (Fam)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At First Instance – Re B (A Child) SC 3-Feb-2016
Habitual Residence of Child not lost
(Orse In re B (A Child) (Reunite International Child Abduction Centre intervening)) The Court considered the notion of habitual residence. The British girl with same sex parents had been taken to Pakistan, and her mother here sought her return. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.606037

Ruiz Zambrano (European Citizenship): ECJ 8 Mar 2011

ECJ Citizenship of the Union – Article 20 TFEU – Grant of right of residence under European Union law to a minor child on the territory of the Member State of which that child is a national, irrespective of the previous exercise by him of his right of free movement in the territory of the Member States – Grant, in the same circumstances, of a derived right of residence, to an ascendant relative, a third country national, upon whom the minor child is dependent – Consequences of the right of residence of the minor child on the employment law requirements to be fulfilled by the third-country national ascendant relative of that minor
A Colombian national had been living in Belgium with his wife, and working (and paying social security contributions), but without a right to reside. Their three children, born between 2003 and 2005, acquired Belgian nationality at birth, and with it European citizenship and the right of free movement, under article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’). When in 2005 he lost his job, he was refused unemployment benefit, because under the relevant national law that depended on his having a right to reside. The European court held that the refusal of such a right was unlawful because it would result in the children being deprived of effective enjoyment of their rights as European citizens.

Judges:

Skouris P

Citations:

[2011] EUECJ C-34/09, C-34/09, [2011] All ER (EC) 491, [2011] 2 FCR 491, [2011] ECR I-1177, [2011] Imm AR 521, [2012] QB 265, [2011] INLR 481, ECLI:EU:C:2011:124, [2011] 2 CMLR 46, [2012] 2 WLR 886

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, TFEU 20

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Ruiz Zambrano (European Citizenship) ECJ 30-Sep-2010
ECJ Opinion – Articles 18, 20 and 21 TFEU – Fundamental rights as general principles of European Union law – Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – European citizenship – . .

Cited by:

Cited – Campbell (Exclusion; Zambrano) Jamaica UTIAC 21-Mar-2013
UTIAC 1. Exclusion decisions are not be confused with exclusion orders.
2. It is settled law that the Secretary of State has the power to make an exclusion decision: see R (on the application of Naik) v . .
Cited – Nzolameso v City of Westminster SC 2-Apr-2015
The court was asked ‘When is it lawful for a local housing authority to accommodate a homeless person a long way away from the authority’s own area where the homeless person was previously living? ‘ The claimant said that on applying for housing she . .
Cited – Agyarko and Ikuga, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 22-Feb-2017
Applications were made by foreign nationals, residing unlawfully in the UK, for leave to remain as the partners of British citizens with whom they had formed relationships during their unlawful residence, relying primarily on the duty imposed on the . .
Cited – Dereci and Others (European Citizenship) ECJ 15-Nov-2011
ECJ Grand Chamber – Citizenship of the Union – Right of residence of nationals of third countries who are family members of Union citizens – Refusal based on the citizen’s failure to exercise the right to freedom . .
Cited – HC, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 15-Nov-2017
This appeal concerns the rights of so-called ‘Zambrano carers’ and their children to financial support from the state. The appellant, an Algerian national married and had children here, but was refused housing after the break up the marriage. HC . .
Cited – Sanneh, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 30-Apr-2012
Challenge to payment of Zambrano Income Support . .
Cited – DH (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 21-Dec-2012
Elias LJ said: ‘The right of residence is a right to reside in the territory of the EU. It is not a right to any particular quality of life or to any particular standard of living. Accordingly, there is no impediment to exercising the right to . .
Cited – Sanneh, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another Admn 10-Apr-2013
. .
Cited – Sanneh and Others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 10-Feb-2015
The appeals concerned the question of whether ‘Zambrano carers’, who are non-EU citizens responsible for the care of an EU citizen child, are entitled to social assistance (that is, non-contributory welfare benefits) on the same basis as EU citizens . .
Cited – Secretary Of State For The Home Department v CS (Judgment : Citizenship Of The Union) ECJ 13-Sep-2016
The Court of Justice held: ‘that there are very specific situations in which, despite the fact that the secondary law on the right of residence of third-country nationals does not apply and the Union citizen concerned has not made use of his freedom . .
Cited – Rendon Marin (Judgment : Citizenship Of The Union) ECJ 13-Sep-2016
ECJ (Grand Chamber) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Citizenship of the Union – Articles 20 and 21 TFEU – Directive 2004/38/EC – Right of a third-country national with a criminal record to reside in a Member . .
Cited – Patel v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Dec-2019
Zambrano states that a non-member state national (‘TCN’) parent of an EU citizen child resident within the EU is entitled to
reside in the EU. This is solely to avoid the EU citizen child being deprived of the substance of their Union . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Immigration, Children

Leading Case

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.452172

JM (A Minor) v Runeckles: QBD 1984

Mann J considered the conditions for criminal responsibility in a child under 14 and said: ‘I would respectfully adopt the learned judge’s use of the phrase ‘seriously wrong’. I regard an act which a child knew to be morally wrong as being but one type of those acts which a child can appreciate to be seriously wrong. I think it is unnecessary to show that the child appreciated that his or her action was morally wrong. It is sufficient that the child appreciated the action was seriously wrong. A court has to look for something beyond mere naughtiness or childish mischief.’

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

(1984) 79 Cr AppR 255

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – JTB, Regina v HL 29-Apr-2009
The defendant appealed against his convictions for sexual assaults. He was aged twelve at the time of the offences, but had been prevented from arguing that he had not known that what he was doing was wrong. The House was asked whether the effect of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Children

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.341784

Regina v Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council ex parte Garlick and similar: HL 19 Mar 1993

No homelessness priority could be established by means of having a child applying for housing, rather than his or her parent. An application by a person suffering mental disability who would also be dependent upon others was also rejected. In each case the true application was by the parent or carer. The Act is concerned with the provision of housing, not social services’ care. A parent or carer would be given priority under the later section by virtue of that care. The authorities’ duties under Part III of the 1985 Act were not owed to dependent children.
Lord Griffiths said: ‘Dependent children are not amongst those classified as in priority need.
Dependent children depend upon their parents or those looking after them to decide where they are to live and the offer of accommodation can only sensibly be made to those in charge of them.
Such a child is in my opinion owed no duty under this Act for it is the intention of the Act that the child’s accommodation will be provided by the parents or those looking after him and it is to those people that the offer of accommodation must be made.
If a family has lost its right to priority treatment through intentional homelessness the parent cannot achieve the same result through the back door by an application in the name of a dependent child.’

Judges:

Lord Griffiths

Citations:

Gazette 07-Jul-1993, Independent 19-Mar-1993, [1993] 2 All ER 65, [1993] 2 WLR 609, [1993] AC 509

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985 59(1) 59(1)(c)

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v London Borough of Barnet ex parte G; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte W; Regina v London Borough of Lambeth ex parte A HL 23-Oct-2003
The applicants sought to oblige the local authority, in compliance with its duties under the 1989 Act, to provide a home for children, and where necessary an accompanying adult.
Held: There were four hurdles for the applicants to cross. They . .
Cited – Royal Borough of Kingston Upon Thames v Prince and Another CA 2-Dec-1998
The Borough’s tenant had died. His wife and daughter had lived with him, but the mother not for long enough to succeed to his tenancy. The daughter (aged thirteen) claimed to have done so having lived with him for three years.
Held: The 1985 . .
Cited – Hotak and Others v London Borough of Southwark and Another SC 13-May-2015
The court was asked as to the duty of local housing authorities towards homeless people who claim to be ‘vulnerable’, and therefore to have ‘a priority need’ for the provision of housing accommodation under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996. Those . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Children

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.87493

R (Mrs) v Central Independent Television Plc: CA 17 Feb 1994

The court did not have power to stop a TV program identifying a ward of court, but which was not about the care of the ward. The first instance court had granted an injunction in relation to a television programme dealing with the arrest and the conviction of a paedophile who was the father of a five year old child. The mother had sought an injunction the terms of which were to ensure that the programme in no way identified the paedophile.
Held: The court allowed the television company’s appeal essentially on the ground that the programme did not so affect the care and upbringing of the child that it was appropriate to invoke the court’s jurisdiction. The court considered that there was no jurisdiction unless the programme could have had that effect. The court should eschew interference with the freedom of the press when exercising its wardship jurisdiction.
Waite LJ said: ‘These authorities establish, in my judgment, that anonymity or confidentiality for a child or its circumstances can only be enforced by injunction in cases where the publicity would, or might in the view of the court threaten the effective working of the court’s own jurisdiction, whether it be in deciding a question about the upbringing of the child, or in exercising, as in Re C [1990] Fam 39, a continuing supervisory role over a child whose future has already been determined. A mere desire to secure for a child the advantages of confidentiality cannot of itself supply such an issue. Confidentiality is an aid to administration of the jurisdiction, and not a right or status which the jurisdiction itself has any power to confer.’
Hoffmann LJ said: ‘In any area of human rights like freedom of speech, I respectfully doubt the wisdom of creating judge made exceptions, particularly when they require a judicial balancing of interests. The danger about such exceptions is that the judges are tempted to use them. The facts of the individual case often seem to demand exceptional treatment because the newspaper’s interest in publication seems trivial and the hurt likely to be inflicted very great. The interests of the individual litigant and the public interest in the freedom of the press are not easily commensurable. It is not surprising that in this case the misery of a five year old girl weighed more heavily with Kirkwood J than the television company’s freedom to publish material which would heighten the dramatic effect of the documentary. That is what one would expect of a sensitive and humane judge exercising the wardship jurisdiction. But no freedom is without cost and in my view the judiciary should not whittle away freedom of speech with ad hoc exceptions. The principle that the press is free from both government and judicial control is more important than the particular case.’
and ‘But this new jurisdiction is concerned only with the privacy of children and their upbringing. It does not extend to ‘injunctive protection of children from publicity which though inimicable to their welfare is not directed at them or those who care for them’ (M and N). It therefore cannot apply to publication of the fact that the child’s father has been convicted of a serious offence, however distressing it may be for the child to be identified as the daughter of such a man. If such a jurisdiction existed it could be exercised to restrain the identification of any convicted criminal who has young children. It may be that the decision in X County Councilcan be brought within Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR’s language because the child’s mother at whose past the intended publication was directed, was actually caring for the child at the time of the application. But the events in question had happened long before the child was born. The publication was not directly concerned with the child or its upbringing, and for my part I think that the judge, for wholly commendable reasons, was asserting a jurisdiction which did not exist.’

Judges:

Waite LJ, Hoffmann LJ

Citations:

Independent 17-Feb-1994, [1994] Fam 192, [1994] 2 FLR 151, [1994] 3 All ER 641

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re M and N (Minors) (Wardship: Publication of Information) CA 1990
The court considered whether to order that a child’s name be not published where the decision to publish would not affect the way in which the child is cared for, the child’s welfare is relevant but not paramount and must be balanced against freedom . .
Cited – X County Council v A and another 1984
The court made orders about the future of the child born to Mary Bell, who had been convicted at the age of 11 of the manslaughter of two little boys. He was asked to protect the new identities under which the child and her mother were living. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Re S (A Child) CA 10-Jul-2003
The mother of the child on behalf of whom the application was made, was to face trial for murder. The child was in care and an order was sought to restrain publiction of material which might reveal his identity, including matters arising during the . .
Cited – In re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) CA 10-Jul-2003
An order was sought to protect from publicity a child whose mother faced trial for the murder of his brother. The child was now in care.
Held: The court must balance the need to protect the child with the need for freedom of the press. The . .
Cited – Pelling v Bruce-Williams, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening CA 5-Jul-2004
The applicant sought an order that his application for a joint residence order should be held in public.
Held: Though there was some attractiveness in the applicant’s arguments, the issue had been fully canvassed by the ECHR. The time had come . .
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 – Livingstone v The Adjudication Panel for England Admn 19-Oct-2006
The claimant challenged a finding that as Mayor of London offensive remarks he had made to a journalist as he was pursued leaving a private party had brought his office into disrepute.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Though the remarks may have . .
Cited – X and Y v Persons Unknown QBD 8-Nov-2006
The claimants sought an injunction against unknown persons who were said to have divulged confidential matters to newspapers. The order had been served on newspapers who now complained that the order was too uncertain to allow them to know how to . .
Cited – Murray v Big Pictures (UK) Ltd; Murray v Express Newspapers CA 7-May-2008
The claimant, a famous writer, complained on behalf of her infant son that he had been photographed in a public street with her, and that the photograph had later been published in a national newspaper. She appealed an order striking out her claim . .
Cited – Kelly (A Minor) v British Broadcasting Corporation FD 25-Jul-2000
K, aged 16, had left home to join what was said to be a religious sect. His whereabouts were unknown. He had been made a ward of court and the Official Solicitor was appointed to represent his interests. He had sent messages to say that he was well . .
Cited – In Re G (Minors) (Celebrities: Publicity) CA 4-Nov-1998
Where extra publicity might attach to proceedings because of the celebrity of the parents, it was wrong to attach extra restrictions on reporting without proper cause. There remains a need to balance the need for the freedom of speech and the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Human Rights, Media

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.86320

A v A (Children: Shared Residence Order): CA 3 Feb 1994

A shared residence order may be still made if it is needed, but it remains an unusual order. Connell J discussed the guidance given as to shared residence order
Butler-Sloss LJ said: ‘Miss Moulder, representing the father, accepts that the conventional order still is that there would be residence to one parent with contact to the other parent. It must be demonstrated that there is positive benefit to the child concerned for a s 11 (4) order to be made, and such positive benefit must be demonstrated in the light of the s 1 checklist . . The usual order that would be made in any case where it is necessary to make an order is that there will be residence to one parent and a contact order to the other parent. Consequently, it will be unusual to make a shared residence order. But the decision whether to make such a shared residence order is always in the discretion of the judge on the special facts of the individual case. It is for him alone to make that decision. However, a shared residence order would, in my view, be unlikely to be made if there were concrete issues still arising between the parties which had not been resolved, such as the amount of contact whether it should be staying or visiting contact or another issue such as education, which were muddying the waters and which were creating difficulties between the parties which reflected the way in which the children were moving from one parent to the other in the contact period . . If a child, on the other hand, has a settled home with one parent and substantial staying contact with the other parent, which has been settled, long-standing and working well, or if there are future plans for sharing the time of the children between two parents where all the parties agree and where there is no possibility of confusion in the mind of the child as to where the child will be and the circumstances of the child at any time, this may be, bearing in mind all the other circumstances, a possible basis for a shared residence order, if it can be demonstrated that there is a positive benefit to the child.’

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ

Citations:

Times 23-Feb-1994, [1994] 1 FLR 669

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 11(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re AR (A Child: Relocation) FD 10-Jun-2010
Both parents had parental responsibility. The French mother wished to return to live in France and to take the five year old child with her, applying to court for the appropriate order.
Held: The court pointed to the real difficulties always . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.77585

Stray v Stray: 1999

Citations:

[1999] 2 FLR 610

Cited by:

Cited – In re X, (Emergency Protection Orders) FD 16-Mar-2006
Within two hours of a case conference which mentioned possible removal of children, but agreed other steps, the local authority applied for an emergency protection order, and forcibly removed the child from the family.
Held: The decision . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.241296

Logan v United Kingdom: ECHR 6 Sep 1996

The complaint was that the mandatory child support payments meant that the father could not visit his children as often as he was entitled under the court’s order to do. The complaint of a direct breach of article 8 failed because he could not show that the impact upon his family life was sufficiently grave, but in another case it might have been.

Citations:

24875/94

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v M HL 8-Mar-2006
The respondent’s child lived with the estranged father for most of each week. She was obliged to contribute child support. She now lived with a woman, and complained that because her relationship was homosexual, she had been asked to pay more than . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.239809

Re X (Disclosure of Information): FD 2001

There cannot be an expectation that expert evidence given in a children’s court will always stay confidential. The various aspects of confidentiality will have greater or lesser weight on the facts of each case. Munby J: ‘Wrapped up in this concept of confidentiality there are, as it seems to me, a number of different factors and interests which need to be borne in mind:
(i) First, there is the interest of the particular child concerned in maintaining the confidentiality and privacy of the proceedings in which he has been involved, what . . Balcombe LJ referred to as the ‘curtain of privacy’.
(ii) But there is also, secondly, the interest of litigants generally that those who, to use Lord Shaw of Dunfermline’s famous words in Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417, 482, ‘appeal for the protection of the court in the case of [wards]’ should not thereby suffer ‘the consequence of placing in the light of publicity their truly domestic affairs’. It is very much in the interests of children generally that those who may wish to have recourse to the court in wardship or other proceedings relating to children are not deterred from doing so by the fear that their private affairs will be exposed to the public gaze – private affairs which often involve matters of the most intimate, personal, painful and potentially embarrassing nature. As Lord Shaw of Dunfermline said: ‘The affairs are truly private affairs; the transactions are transactions truly intra familiam’.
(iii) Thirdly, there is a public interest in encouraging frankness in children’s cases, what Nicholls LJ referred to in Brown v Matthews [1990] Ch 662, 681C, as the frank and ready co-operation from people as diverse as doctors, school teachers, neighbours, the child in question, the parents themselves, and other close relations, including other children in the same family, on which the proper functioning of the system depends . . it is very much in the interests of children generally that potential witnesses in such proceedings are not deterred from giving evidence by the fear that their private affairs or privately expressed views will be exposed to the public gaze.
(iv) Fourthly, there is a particular public interest in encouraging frankness in children’s cases on the part of perpetrators of child abuse of whatever kind . . .
(v) Finally, there is a public interest in preserving faith with those who have given evidence to the family court in the belief that it would remain confidential. However, as both Ralph Gibson LJ in Brown v Matthews [1990] Ch 662, 672B . . and Balcombe LJ in In re Manda [1993] Fam 183, 195H . . make clear, whilst persons who give evidence in child proceedings can normally assume that their evidence will remain confidential, they are not entitled to assume that it will remain confidential in all circumstances . . .’

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2001] 2 FLR 440

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .

Cited by:

Cited – British Broadcasting Company v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council and X and Y FD 24-Nov-2005
Application was made by the claimant for orders discharging an order made in 1991 to protect the identity of children and social workers embroiled in allegations of satanic sex abuse. The defendant opposed disclosure of the names of two social . .
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 – 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

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.237482

Re H (2004): 2004

After the birth C had been placed with a foster carer with a view to adoption. the authority had had concerns about the mother’s ability to care for the child after her treatment of older children. The mother found a more stable relationship, and now sought an assessment, and was supported by the guardian and psychiatrist. The authority agreed that some assessment was necessary, but not a residential assessment.
Held: The authority’s proposal would further delay the final order against C’s interests. The changes in the mother’s lifestyle, and the support which would be provided, justified the proposed intensive residential assessment. Without a residential assessment, the court would be deprived of evidence it would need to make the order. The mother’s appeal succeeded.

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1628 (Fam)

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.228171

Re ET (Serious Injuries: Standard of Proof): FD 2003

The court heard a care application in which the baby had sustained skull, brain and other injuries alleged to be at the hands of her parents.
Held: The standard of proof was the civil standard of the balance of probabilities and directed himself according to the principles in re H. ‘Although the result is much the same, this [the cogency requirement] does not mean that where a serious allegation is in issue the standard of proof required is higher. It means only that the inherent probability or improbability of an event is itself a matter to be taken into account when weighing the probabilities and deciding whether, on balance, the event occurred.
So it may very well be that, in looking at these more recent dicta, one is (as Miss Ball put it) somewhat ‘dancing on the head of a pin’; and no counsel has gone so far as to submit to me that, in a serious case such as this, it is now the criminal standard which should in terms be directly applied.
I therefore propose, in applying the civil standard and the re H (Minors)(Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [1996] AC 563 . . cogency test here, to have well in mind the dicta in the latter two cases just cited. So, whenever in this judgment I ‘find’ something occurred, or expressed myself ‘satisfied’ or ‘persuaded’ of some fact or other, it is in the light of the authorities which I have just been discussing and on the basis that, in this very serious case, the difference between the civil and the criminal standards of proof is ‘largely illusory’.’

Judges:

Bodey J

Citations:

[2003] 2 FLR 1205

Citing:

Applied – 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 – B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary QBD 5-Apr-2000
The defendant appealed the making of a sex offender order under 1998 Act. The justices had found that the defendant was a sex offender within section 2(1)(a) and that he had acted on a number of occasions in a way which brought him within section . .

Cited by:

Doubted – In re LU (A Child); In re LB (A Child) (Serious Injury: Standard of Proof); re U (A Child) (Department for Education and Skills intervening) CA 14-May-2004
In each case, the other parent appealed care orders where she had been found to have injured her children. In each case the sole evidence was the injury to the child’s health and expert medical evidence. The cases were referred following the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Children

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.196918

A Health Authority v X (Discovery: Medical Conduct): CA 2001

The court considered whether papers in a children’s case should be made available to the GMC: ‘There is obviously a high public interest, analogous to the public interest in the due administration of criminal justice, in the proper administration of professional disciplinary hearings, particularly in the field of medicine.’ ‘The balance came down in favour of production as it invariably does, save in exceptional cases.’

Judges:

Thorpe LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 2014, [2002] 1 FLR 1045

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – 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:

Appealed to – 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 – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Children

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.194857

In re D (Simultaneous applications for care order and freeing order): 1999

The judge considering two applications for a care order and an adoption order had confused the proper order of issues to be considered, and that error contaminated his decision. The two should be dealt with in sequence.

Judges:

Thorpe LJ

Citations:

[1999] 2 FLR 49

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – In re M (a Minor) (Care order: Freeing Application) CA 18-Dec-2003
Where a local authority sought both a care order and an order freeing the child for adoption, the court must be careful to distinguish between the applications. The care application should be dealt with first. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Adoption

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.190239

In re M (Care: Challenging decisions by local authority): 2001

Citations:

(2001) 2 FLR 1300

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – C and Another v Bury Metropolitan Borough Council FD 18-Jul-2002
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.181248

Re G (Care proceedings: split trials): CA 2001

In a situation where an application is made for a care order, and the threshold criteria are met, but the court cannot decide which carer is responsible, the preferable interpretation is that in such cases the court is able to proceed at the welfare stage on the footing that each of the possible perpetrators is a possible perpetrator. The fact that a judge cannot always decide which means that when one gets to the welfare hearing, he has to proceed on the basis that each is a possible perpetrator. This accords with the basic principle that in considering the requirements of the child’s welfare the court will have regard to all the circumstances of the case. ‘When the facts found at the preliminary hearing leave open the possibility that a parent or other carer was a perpetrator of proved harm, it would not be right for that conclusion to be excluded from consideration at the disposal hearing as one of the matters to be taken into account. The importance to be attached to that possibility, as to every feature of the case, necessarily depends on the circumstances.’

Judges:

Hale LJ

Citations:

[2001] 1 FLR 872

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re O and N (Minors); In re B (Minors) (Care: Preliminary hearing) HL 3-Apr-2003
The appeals were from conflicting decisions in care applications where one or other or both parents were guilty of lack of care, but there was no evidence to say which was responsible.
Held: The threshold criteria had been met, and the court . .
Cited – North Yorkshire County Council v SA and others CA 1-Jul-2003
The child was taken to hospital with injuries which the doctors concluded were non-accidental. The identity of the abuser was in doubt.
Held: The court set out to identify the procedures in cases involving suspected non-accidental injuries . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.180421

Teame v Aberash and Others; Regina v Secretary of State for Home Dept ex parte Teame: CA 8 Apr 1994

Home Secretary may order deportation of a child’s guardian despite a pending appeal for residence order in favour of the applicant. Such a deportation would not be a contempt of court.

Citations:

Ind Summary 02-May-1994, Times 08-Apr-1994

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Children

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.89759

In Re H (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody): CA 16 Nov 1999

Once a court has become involved in the issues surrounding the ‘right of custody’ of a child as set down in the convention, an English court would not attempt to substitute its own jurisdiction. The child was of unmarried parents in Ireland. The father applied to the court there for contact, and the mother left to come to England. The additional application for guardianship made the court seised of the custody issue. The term should be interpreted widely.

Citations:

Times 16-Nov-1999, Gazette 08-Dec-1999

Statutes:

Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – In Re H (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody) HL 3-Feb-2000
It was possible for the court itself to have sufficient rights of custody under the Convention to allow a party to apply on the basis that an abduction had interfered with those rights of custody. A father had begun proceedings but did not himself . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – In Re H (A Child) (Abduction: Rights of Custody) HL 3-Feb-2000
It was possible for the court itself to have sufficient rights of custody under the Convention to allow a party to apply on the basis that an abduction had interfered with those rights of custody. A father had begun proceedings but did not himself . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81912

In Re J (A Minor) (Prohibited Steps Order: Circumcision): CA 22 Dec 1999

Where there was a dispute between parents as to the necessity or propriety of circumcising a child, it was appropriate that the court should be involved to make the decision. Such decisions were vital to the child’s upbringing and irreversible. Here the court had properly considered the matters before him. One parent was not able to make such a decision against the wishes of the other. The circumcision of the child should only be carried out where the parents agree or where a court, in settling the dispute between them, decides that the operation is in the best interests of the child. The President said ‘There is, in my view, a small group of important decisions made on behalf of a child which, in the absence of agreement of those with parental responsibility, ought not to be carried out or arranged by one parent carer although she has parental responsibility under section 2(7) of the Children Act 1989. Such a decision ought not to be made without the specific approval of the court. Sterilisation is one example. The change of a child’s surname is another.’

Citations:

Times 22-Dec-1999, [2000] 1 FLR 571

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 2(7)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – In re C (a Child) (Immunisation: Parental rights); In re F (a Child) (Imminisation: Parental rights) CA 30-Jul-2003
In two actions heard together, single mothers resisted attempts to have their children immunised at the behest of the fathers, who in each case had parental responsibility.
Held: A one-parent carer did not have the freedom to make such a . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81957

In Re F (A Child): CA 13 Oct 1999

Where a child, having attained sixteen, but with severe mental disability, sought to return home where the local authority feared she might be the victim of abuse, the proper approach was to seek wardship, where she might have separate representation. An application for the displacement of the father as the nearest relative was inappropriate, since her choice was not seriously irresponsible.

Citations:

Gazette 13-Oct-1999, Times 19-Oct-1999, Gazette 08-Dec-1999

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 1(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81872

In Re K (A Minor) (Removal From Jurisdiction: Practice): CA 2 Sep 1999

Hearings involving the temporary removal of a child to a non-Convention country needed full preparation, and must be heard by a Family Division judge. The magnitude of the risks and the irretrievable consequences required this. Care should be taken to implement the fullest safeguards, and if necessary expert evidence on the practicality of enforcing such safeguards in that country in the case of breach.

Citations:

Gazette 02-Sep-1999

Statutes:

Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, International

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81971