Tag: Family

Re Seaford Dec’d: CA 1968

A decree of divorce was made absolute by the court on the same day as, but some hours later than, the husband respondent had died. The court considered the general rule that a judicial act takes effect at the start of the day on which it is made.
Held: The rule did not apply in family proceedings. Willmer LJ said that the rule could not be relied upon so as to confer upon the Court a jurisdiction which it did not have at the time when the order was made. The marriage having been determined by the husband’s death, the Court had no power to dissolve it when the order was made.
Davies LJ rejected the submission that the order took effect at te beginning of the day and said that this legal fiction had no relevance when there was evidence as to the real facts.

Judges:

Willmer LJ, Davies LJ

Citations:

[1968] P 53

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Re Palmer (A Deceased Debtor), Palmer v Palmer CA 6-Apr-1994
Property had been conveyed to the deceased and the appellant, his widow, to be held as joint tenants. The deceased dies whilst under investigation for defalcations as a solicitor, and an insolvency administration order was obtained in the estate. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice, Wills and Probate

Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.267521

B v B: FD 15 Jan 2010

Judgment following the hearing of the wife’s ancillary relief application.

Judges:

Moylan J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 193 (Fam), [2010] Fam Law 905, [2010] 2 FLR 1214

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.417773

Re Besterman, decd: CA 1984

In the case of an application under the Act by a surviving spouse, maintenance is not the only, or even the dominant, consideration to be taken into account by the court. ‘In an application under section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 the court is directed, so far as it is practicable and is just to do so, to put the parties in the same financial position as they would have been if the marriage had not broken down. In that calculation, the concept of what is `reasonable’ is nowhere mentioned, although the parties’ financial needs – which have been construed to mean `reasonable requirements’ – constitute one element to be considered. In an application under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, however, the figure resulting from the section 25 exercise is merely one of the factors to which the court is to `have regard’ and the overriding consideration is what is `reasonable’ in all the circumstances. It is, however, obviously a very important consideration and one which the statute goes out of its way to bring to the court’s attention.’

Judges:

Oliver LJ

Citations:

[1984] Ch 458

Statutes:

Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 2, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Moody v Stevenson CA 12-Jul-1991
The widower aged 81, appealed against refusal of provision under the 1975 Act from his wife’s estate. She had left him nothing. The judge at first instance had found, applying Styler, that her treatment was not unreasonable, and that therefore no . .
Cited – Jessop v Jessop CA 2-Jan-1992
The court considered the provision to be made under the 1975 Act for a surviving spouse: ‘In his argument in this court Mr. Vane relied strongly on s 3(2) and referred us to a recent case in this court, Moody v. Stevenson, a decision of Mustill LJ . .
Approved – Elizabeth Adams v Julian James Lewis (Administrator of the Estate of Frank Adams dec) ChD 26-Jan-2001
The widow’s claim under the Act was contested by three daughters where the widow received a specific legacy and the will gave trustees a power to apply any part of the residue during the lifetime of the widow to provide and maintain a suitable . .
Cited – Moorhead v Moorhead ChNI 11-Jan-2002
The deceased’s widow complained that her husband’s will had not made proper provision for her as was required by the order which ‘ In the case of a spouse reasonable financial provision means such financial provision as it would be reasonable in all . .
Preferred – Krubert, Re; Krubert v Davis and Others CA 27-Jun-1996
The beneficiaries under the will appealed against an order under the 1975 Act, effectively transferring the entire estate to the surviving spouse.
Held: The effect of sections 1, 2 and the other material provisions of the 1975 Act is that on . .
Cited – Barron v Woodhead and Another ChD 25-Jun-2008
The claimant sought provision under the 1975 Act from the estate of his deceased wife. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Family

Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.196901

Moody v Stevenson: CA 12 Jul 1991

The widower aged 81, appealed against refusal of provision under the 1975 Act from his wife’s estate. She had left him nothing. The judge at first instance had found, applying Styler, that her treatment was not unreasonable, and that therefore no jurisdiction to make an award arose.
Held: The court considered the application of section 3(2): ‘and, in the case of an application by the wife or husband of the deceased, the court shall also, unless at the date of death a decree of judicial separation was in force and the separation was continuing, have regard to the provision which the applicant might reasonably have expected to receive if on the day on which the deceased died the marriage, instead of being terminated by death, had been terminated by a decree of divorce.’
Waite J said: ‘The objective is that the acceptable minimum posthumous provision for a surviving spouse should correspond as closely as possible to the inchoate rights enjoyed by that spouse in the deceased’s lifetime by virtue of his or her prospective entitlement under the matrimonial law.’ and ‘In other words the Act of 1975, when stripped down to its barest terms, amounts to a direction to the judge to ask himself in surviving spouses cases: `What would a family judge have ordered for this couple if divorce instead of death had divided them; what is the effect of any other section 3 factors of which I have not taken account already in answering that question; and what, in the light of those two inquiries, am I to make of the reasonableness, when viewed objectively, of the dispositions made by the will and/or intestacy of the deceased?’ If the judge finds those dispositions unreasonable, he will go on to ask himself: `What, in the light of those same inquiries, would be a reasonable provision for me to order for the applicant under section 2?” and ‘The starting point when fixing an appropriate provision under section 2 of the Act will, as already explained, be a consideration of the presumed entitlement of the husband under a notional divorce.’ In this case, the result was an order permitting him to continue to occupy the house.

Judges:

Mustill LJ and Waite J

Citations:

[1992] Ch 486, [1992] 2 WLR 640, [1992] 2 All ER 524, Independent 17-Sep-1991, Times 30-Jul-1991

Statutes:

Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 3(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Re Besterman, decd CA 1984
In the case of an application under the Act by a surviving spouse, maintenance is not the only, or even the dominant, consideration to be taken into account by the court. ‘In an application under section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 the . .
Cited – In re Styler 1942
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Jessop v Jessop CA 2-Jan-1992
The court considered the provision to be made under the 1975 Act for a surviving spouse: ‘In his argument in this court Mr. Vane relied strongly on s 3(2) and referred us to a recent case in this court, Moody v. Stevenson, a decision of Mustill LJ . .
Cited – Moorhead v Moorhead ChNI 11-Jan-2002
The deceased’s widow complained that her husband’s will had not made proper provision for her as was required by the order which ‘ In the case of a spouse reasonable financial provision means such financial provision as it would be reasonable in all . .
Not preferred – Krubert, Re; Krubert v Davis and Others CA 27-Jun-1996
The beneficiaries under the will appealed against an order under the 1975 Act, effectively transferring the entire estate to the surviving spouse.
Held: The effect of sections 1, 2 and the other material provisions of the 1975 Act is that on . .
Cited – Barron v Woodhead and Another ChD 25-Jun-2008
The claimant sought provision under the 1975 Act from the estate of his deceased wife. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Family

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.196902

Lake v Lake: CA 1955

Mrs Lake’s answer to an allegation of adultery had been one of denial or, in the alternative, condonation. Her husband’s petition was dismissed, the Commissioner finding that there had been adultery but that it had been condoned. She sought to appeal against the finding of adultery
Held: Her appeal was refused. A party cannot appeal against a judgment when he has no complaint about the order in fact made. A party’s statutory right to appeal is governed by section 27 which allows for an appeal from ‘the whole or any part of any judgment or order’, which means the ‘formal judgment or order.’ It is the order that the court makes that disposes of the proceedings and provides the basis for an appeal, not the issuing of the reasons for it in the form of the court’s judgmentit is the order that the court makes that disposes of the proceedings and provides the basis for an appeal, not the issuing of the reasons for it in the form of the court’s judgment.
Hodson LJ said: ‘This is an attempt by a successful party to appeal against an order which she has obtained in her favour. In my judgment, this court cannot entertain such an appeal.’

Judges:

Sir Raymond Evershed MR, Hodson LJ

Citations:

[1955] P 336

Statutes:

Judicature Act 1925 27

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Jones and others v Ceredigion County Council CA 28-Jul-2005
The parties had challenged the respondent’s decision not to provide free transport to school. The judge granted certificates allowing leave to apply direct to the House of Lords on two issues, and to the Court of Appeal on one other. The House later . .
Cited – Office of Communications and Another v Floe Telecom Ltd CA 10-Feb-2009
The court was asked to accept an appeal against not the order made by the tribunal, but the terms of the reasoned judgment.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The Tribunal had made findings which were unnecessary to its judgment, and which were . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Morina and Another CA 23-Jul-2007
The Secretary of State had won his case on the substance but wished to challenge parts of the judgement which dealt with jurisdictional points.
Held: The court could hear an appeal by a successful party where there were good reasons for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Family

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.230066

Mcfarlane v Mcfarlane: FD 18 Jun 2009

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 891 (Fam), [2009] Fam Law 1020, [2009] 2 FLR 1322

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Minton v Minton HL 1979
Establishing Clean Break on Divorce
The House set out the principles for establishing a ‘clean break’ financial settlement on a divorce. Once a capital claim in a divorce has been given effect in a court order, the court does not have jurisdiction to vary it. Lord Scarman said: ‘Once . .
See Also – Miller v Miller; McFarlane v McFarlane HL 24-May-2006
Fairness on Division of Family Capital
The House faced the question of how to achieve fairness in the division of property following a divorce. In the one case there were substantial assets but a short marriage, and in the other a high income, but low capital.
Held: The 1973 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347355

Seiden v Fularon: CA 17 Dec 2008

The applicant sought leave to appeal against the refusal of a grant of a decree of nullity. The parties had divorced, but he then found that she had already been married and that the purported marriage had been bigamous. He appealed, but the the order was refused because the decree nisi had been made absolute.
Held: Leave was refused, there was no jurisdiction to appeal once the decree nisi had been made absolute. Nevertheles the court hearing the ancillary relief application might refer to the case of S-T v J [1998] Fam 103

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1548

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347064

NA v MA: FD 24 Nov 2006

The very wealthy H found that W had committed adultery with one of his friends. H pressured W to sign an agreement providing that she would receive a specified lump sum and annual payments if their marriage ended in divorce. W signed it because H insisted that she should do so if the marriage was to continue.
Held: Baron J said that: ‘as the idea of an agreement evolved it hardened into a legal, post-nuptial agreement’. It was on this basis that H sought to have the agreement converted into an order of the court. When dealing with the law Baron J did not distinguish clearly between ante-nuptial, post-nuptial and separation agreements. She said: ‘It is an accepted fact that an agreement entered into between husband and wife does not oust the jurisdiction of this court. For many years, agreements between spouses were considered void for public policy reasons but this is no longer the case. In fact, over the years, pre-nuptial ‘contracts’ have become increasingly common place and are, I accept, much more likely to be accepted by these courts as governing what should occur between the parties when the prospective marriage comes to an end. That is, of course, subject to the discretion of the court and the application of a test of fairness/manifest unfairness. It may well be that Parliament will provide legislation but, until that occurs, current authority makes it clear that the agreements are not enforceable per se, although they can be persuasive (or definitive) depending upon the precise circumstances that lead to their completion.’
The judge went on to apply the law of undue influence, holding: ‘I am clear that, to overturn the agreement, I have to be satisfied that this wife’s will was overborne by her husband exercising undue pressure or influence over her. I am also clear that if I do not overturn the agreement per se, I still have to consider whether it is fair and should be approved so as to become a court order.’
She overturned the agreement on the ground of undue influence.

Judges:

Baron J DBE

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2900 (Fam), [2007] 1 FLR 1760, [2007] Fam Law 295

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Radmacher v Granatino CA 2-Jul-2009
Husband and wife, neither English, had married in England. Beforehand they had signed a prenuptial agreement in Germany agreeing that neither should claim against the other on divorce. The wife appealed against an order to pay a lump sum to the . .
Cited – Radmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino SC 20-Oct-2010
The parties, from Germany and France married and lived at first in England. They had signed a pre-nuptial agreement in Germany which would have been valid in either country of origin. H now appealed against a judgment which bound him to it, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Undue Influence

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279027

H v L and R: FD 7 Dec 2006

A male litigant in person wished to cross-examine a young adult woman whom he was alleged to have abused sexually when she was a child. The young woman in question was a borderline anorexic and a suicide risk. In criminal proceedings, section 34A of the 1988 Act and sections 34 and 35 of the 1999 Act would forbid a defendant from cross-examining a child witness personally.
Held: No such provisions applied in the Family Courts. The Attorney-General , at the court’s urgent request, agreed, exceptionally, to provide an advocate.
Wood J concluded: ‘I would invite urgent attention as to creating a new statutory provision which provides for representation in such circumstances, analogous to the existing statutory framework governing criminal proceedings as set out in the 1999 Act. Such a statutory provision should also provide that the costs of making available to the court an advocate should fall on public funds. I can see no distinction in policy terms between the criminal and the civil process. Logic strongly suggests that such a service should be made available to the family jurisdiction. If it is inappropriate for a litigant in person to cross-examine such a witness in the criminal jurisdiction, why not in the family jurisdiction? This is my judgment’.

Judges:

Wood J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3099 (Fam), [2007] 2 FLR 162, [2007] 1 FCR 430

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 34 35, Criminal Justice Act 1988 34A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – Chief Constable and Another v YK and Others FD 6-Oct-2010
The court gave directions in Forced Marriage Protection order applications. An order had been made at the request of the police on behalf of A, and the court had declined to discharge it on A’s own application.
Held: Special advocates were not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279030

Mubarak v Mubarik: FD 9 May 2006

Judges:

Bodey J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1260 (Fam), [2007] 1 FLR 722, [2007] Fam Law 13, [2007] 1 WLR 271

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Mubarak v Mubarak FD 30-Nov-2000
In ancillary relief proceedings, where a respondent company director conceded that the assets and income of a company could be treated as his own, it could be proper to draw aside the veil of incorporation. Nevertheless the court should be careful . .
See Also – Mubarak v Mubarak CA 2001
A judgment summons, issued was issued by the wife to enforce a lump sum order made against her husband in their divorce proceedings. The judge had performed his statutory duty which included having to satisfy himself under s. 25 of the 1973 Act of . .
See Also – Mubarak v Mubarik 2003
The court was asked as to whether the expression ‘in the possession of’ in RSC Ord.48 extended to documents not physically held by the judgment debtor but to sight of which he has a clear and enforceable right.
Held: The expression did so . .

Cited by:

See Also – Mubarak v Mubarik and others FD 12-Jan-2007
. .
See Also – Mubarak v Mubarak and others CA 17-Jul-2007
Application for leave to appeal against ancillary relief order – protracted proceedings. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279019

MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State and Another: SC 22 Feb 2017

Challenge to rules requiring certain minimum levels of income (Minimum Income Requirement – MIR) for allowing entry for non-EEA spouse.
Held: The challenges udder the Human Rights Act to the Rules themselves failed. Nor did any separate issue of discrimination arise under article 14.
However, the appendix with instructions for entry clearance officers considering the situation was inadequate: ‘Rather than treating the best interests of children as a primary consideration, taking account of the factors summarised in Jeunesse, they lay down a highly prescriptive criterion requiring ‘factors . . that can only be alleviated by the presence of the applicant in the UK’, such as support during a major medical procedure, or ‘prevention of abandonment where there is no other family member . . ‘. ‘
and ‘while the rules as such are not open to challenge, there are aspects of the instructions to entry clearance officers which require revision to ensure that the decisions made by them are consistent with their duties under the HRA. In the light of that conclusion, the Secretary of State might wish to consider whether it would be more efficient to revise the rules themselves, to indicate the circumstances in which alternative sources of funding should or might be taken into account, rather than simply to revise the guidance.’
‘The MIR is part of an overall strategy aimed at reducing net migration. Its particular aims are no doubt entirely legitimate: to ensure, so far as practicable, that the couple do not have recourse to welfare benefits and have sufficient resources to be able to play a full part in British life. As accepted by the courts below, those aims are sufficient to justify the interference with, or lack of respect for, the article 8 right . . we would also reject the suggestion that there is no rational connection between those legitimate aims and the particular income threshold chosen. The work of the Migration Advisory Committee is a model of economic rationality. Even though it had to make certain assumptions, it was careful to identify and rationalise these. Making those assumptions, it arrived at an income figure above which the couple would not have any recourse to welfare benefits, including tax credits and housing benefits. That being a legitimate aim, it is also not possible to say that a lesser threshold, and thus a less intrusive measure, should have been adopted. It may, of course, have a disproportionate effect in the particular circumstances of an individual case, but that is not the claim currently before us . . ‘

Judges:

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

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 10, [2017] 1 WLR 771, [2017] Imm AR 729, [2017] HRLR 6, [2017] WLR(D) 124, [2017] INLR 575, UKSC 2015/0011

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video

Statutes:

Immigration Rules, European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another CA 11-Jul-2014
Aikens LJ said: ‘The court would not be entitled to strike down the rule unless satisfied that it was incapable of being operated in a proportionate way and so was inherently unjustified in all or nearly all cases.’ and ‘If the particular . .
Appeal from – The Secretary of State for The Home Department v SS (Congo) and Others CA 23-Apr-2015
The court considered the proper approach to be adopted, in light of new Immigration Rules promulgated in July 2012, to applications for leave to enter the United Kingdom by persons who are family members of someone already present here. . .
Cited – KA and others (Adequacy of Maintenance) Pakistan IAT 4-Sep-2006
The Tribunal adopted the level of income support as the test of adequate maintenance – at that level it could not be said that the family were not properly maintained but neither should it be contemplated that immigrants would live below that level. . .
Cited – AM (Ethiopia) and others v Entry Clearance Officer CA 16-Oct-2008
When applying for entry under a sponsorship arrangement, the three applicable rules disallowed third party support.
Laws LJ said: ‘The immigrant’s article 8 rights will (must be) protected by the Secretary of State and the court whether or not . .
At First Instance – MM and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 5-Jul-2013
WLRD When applied to either recognised refugees or British citizens Appendix FM of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules (HC 395), as inserted, which prevented entry clearance to a party to a marriage . .
Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Cited – Ali and Bibi, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 18-Nov-2015
At the claimants alleged that the rules requiring a foreign spouse or partner of a British citizen or a person settled in this country to pass a test of competence in the English language before coming to live here were an unjustifiable interference . .
Cited – Abdulaziz etc v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-1985
Three women, all lawfully settled in the UK, had married third-country nationals but, at first, the Secretary of State had refused permission for their husbands to remain with them, or join them, in the UK.
Held: The refusals of permission had . .
Cited – Boultif v Switzerland ECHR 2-Aug-2001
The applicant complained under Article 8 that the Swiss authorities had not renewed his residence permit, after which he had been separated from his wife, a Swiss citizen and who could not be expected to follow him to Algeria. Switzerland argued . .
Cited – Tuquabo-Tekle and Others v The Netherlands ECHR 1-Dec-2005
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Preliminary objection dismissed (estoppel); Violation of Art. 8; Pecuniary damage – claim dismissed; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses . .
Cited – Rodrigues Da Silva and Hoogkamer v The Netherlands ECHR 31-Jan-2006
A Brazilian mother came to the Netherlands in 1994 and set up home with a Dutch national but not applying for a residence permit. In 1996 they had a daughter who became a Dutch national. In 1997 they split up and the daughter remained with her . .
Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – Uner v The Netherlands ECHR 18-Oct-2006
(Grand Chamber) The court considered the application of article 8 considerations in extradition and similar proceedings, and said: ‘the best interests and well-being of the children, in particular the seriousness of the difficulties which any . .
Cited – Neulinger And Shuruk v Switzerland ECHR 6-Jul-2010
(Grand Chamber) The Swiss Court had rejected the claimant mother’s claim, under article 13b of the Hague Convention, that there was a grave risk that returning the child to Israel would lead to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place him . .
Cited – Nunez v Norway ECHR 28-Jun-2011
Article 8 rights can be sufficient to tip the balance in favour against deportation of an immigrant. . .
Cited – Quila and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Oct-2011
Parties challenged the rule allowing the respondent to deny the right to enter or remain here to non EU citizens marrying a person settled and present here where either party was under the age of 21. The aim of the rule was to deter forced . .
Cited – IAA And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Jan-2014
. .
Cited – Jeunesse v The Netherlands ECHR 3-Oct-2014
(Grand Chamber) Although the applicant had married and had three children while her immigration status in the Netherlands was precarious, there were exceptional circumstances such that a fair balance had not been struck between the competing . .
Cited – Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Nov-2016
The appellant, an Iraqi national had arrived in 2000 as a child, and stayed unlawfully after failure of his asylum claim. He was convicted twice of drugs offences. On release he was considered a low risk of re-offending. He had been in a serious . .
Cited – Ahmut v The Netherlands ECHR 28-Nov-1996
The bond between natural parents and their children is a strong indicator of the existence of family life: ‘from the moment of the child’s birth and by the very fact of it, there exists between him and his parents a bond amounting to ‘family life’, . .
Cited – Sen v The Netherlands ECHR 21-Dec-2001
. .
Cited – Konstatinov v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Apr-2007
The applicant, of Roma origin with a troubled and criminal history. The Court considered the minister’s refusal of her request for a residence permit to enable her to live with her husband (entitled to permanent residence since 1988) and their son . .
Cited – EB (Kosovo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 25-Jun-2008
The claimant arrived as a child from Kosovo in 1999. He said that the decision after so long, it would breach his human rights now to order his return.
Held: The adjudicator had failed to address the effect of delay. That was a relevant . .
Cited – Baiai and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 30-Jul-2008
In order to prevent marriages of convenience in the UK the Secretary of State introduced a scheme under which certain persons subject to immigration control required her written permission to marry and would not receive it unless they were present . .
Cited – Y v Russia ECHR 4-Dec-2008
The applicants complained about the first applicant’s deportation to China, about his unlawful detention, about the disruption of their family life and about the absence of domestic remedies. They referred to Articles 3, 5, 8 and 13 of the . .
Cited – O’Donoghue and Others v United Kingdom ECHR 14-Dec-2010
. .
Cited – Alvi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 18-Jul-2012
The claimant had entered as a student, and then stayed under a work permit. New rules were brought in, and because his occupation as a physiotherapy assistant was not listed, he was not credited with sufficient points for a permit. The Court of . .
Cited – Zoumbas v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2013
The appellant challenged a decision that he did not qualify for asylum or humanitarian protection and that his further representations were not a fresh human rights claim under paragraph 353 of the Immigration Rules. He argued that the return to the . .
Cited – SS (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 22-May-2013
Laws LJ’s observed that for a claim under article 8 of the ECHR to prevail, it must be ‘a very strong claim indeed’ . .
Cited – EB (Kosovo) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 25-Jun-2008
The claimant arrived as a child from Kosovo in 1999. He said that the decision after so long, it would breach his human rights now to order his return.
Held: The adjudicator had failed to address the effect of delay. That was a relevant . .
Cited – AM (Ethiopia) and others v Entry Clearance Officer CA 16-Oct-2008
When applying for entry under a sponsorship arrangement, the three applicable rules disallowed third party support.
Laws LJ said: ‘The immigrant’s article 8 rights will (must be) protected by the Secretary of State and the court whether or not . .
Cited – Jones v First Tier Tribunal and Another SC 17-Apr-2013
The claimant had been injured when a lorry driver swerved to avoid hitting a man who stood in his path. He said that the deceased’s act of suicide amounted to an offence of violence under the 1861 Act so as to bring his own claim within the 2001 . .
Cited – SS (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 22-May-2013
Laws LJ’s observed that for a claim under article 8 of the ECHR to prevail, it must be ‘a very strong claim indeed’ . .
Cited – MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another CA 11-Jul-2014
Aikens LJ said: ‘The court would not be entitled to strike down the rule unless satisfied that it was incapable of being operated in a proportionate way and so was inherently unjustified in all or nearly all cases.’ and ‘If the particular . .
Cited – The Secretary of State for The Home Department v SS (Congo) and Others CA 23-Apr-2015
The court considered the proper approach to be adopted, in light of new Immigration Rules promulgated in July 2012, to applications for leave to enter the United Kingdom by persons who are family members of someone already present here. . .
Cited – Mukarkar v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 25-Jul-2006
The applicant, a Yemeni citizen, obtained entry clearance as a visitor by deception and then unsuccessfully sought leave to remain as a dependent relative of his many children settled here. He had numerous ailments and his health was continuing to . .
Cited – Mahad (Previously referred to as AM) (Ethiopia) v Entry Clearance Officer SC 16-Dec-2009
The claimants each sought entry to be with members of their family already settled here. The Court was asked whether the new Immigration Rules imposed a requirement which permitted third party support by someone other than the nominated sponsor.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights, Family

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.575312

MM and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 5 Jul 2013

WLRD When applied to either recognised refugees or British citizens Appendix FM of the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules (HC 395), as inserted, which prevented entry clearance to a party to a marriage where the income of the sponsor did not meet the minimum threshold, was a disproportionate interference with the right to respect for family life under article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Judges:

Blake J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1900 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 280, [2014] Imm AR 245, [2014] 1 WLR 2306

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another CA 11-Jul-2014
Aikens LJ said: ‘The court would not be entitled to strike down the rule unless satisfied that it was incapable of being operated in a proportionate way and so was inherently unjustified in all or nearly all cases.’ and ‘If the particular . .
At First Instance – MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State and Another SC 22-Feb-2017
Challenge to rules requiring certain minimum levels of income (Minimum Income Requirement – MIR) for allowing entry for non-EEA spouse.
Held: The challenges udder the Human Rights Act to the Rules themselves failed. Nor did any separate issue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration, Family

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.512208

Stodgell v Stodgell Admn: Admn 18 Jul 2008

The court heard divorce ancillary relief applications against the background of an impending criminal confiscation order against the husband.

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1925 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Stodgell v Stodgell FD FD 18-Jul-2008
The parties were involved in ancillary relief proceedings. At the same time the husband was in prison after having hidden earnings from his business, and was subject to an unsatisfied confiscation order. The guardian had had doubts about the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Crime

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276245

In Re M (A Debtor) (488-Io of 1996): ChD 10 Feb 1999

A wife who had an order for ancillary relief in her favour, but whose husband entered into an Individual Voluntary Arrangement, was obliged to accept the allotted dividend, but her special position under the Act was also to be acknowledged. She had the choice of awaiting discharge from the IVA first.

Citations:

Gazette 03-Mar-1999, Times 10-Feb-1999

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 281(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Insolvency

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.82012

Crown Prosecution Service v MN: Admn 21 Nov 2005

Application by the Crown Prosecution Service for the appointment of a receiver under section 80 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA No 3 of 2000) and in the Family Division hearing ancillary relief proceedings.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2622 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Family

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.271158

Merritt v Merritt: CA 27 Apr 1970

The parties had setted an arramngement for the house on splitting up. Following the agreement, she repaid the mortgage over time, and then requested the conveyance of the house under the agreement. She now appealed from an order refusing the transfer into her name.
Held: The appeal failed. Agreements between husband and wide are not generally intended to have legal effect, but ‘It is altogether different when the parties are not living in amity but are separated, or about to separate. They then bargain keenly. They do not rely on honourable understandings. They want everything cut and dried. It may safely be presumed that they intend to create legal relations.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Widgery, Karminski LJJ

Citations:

[1970] EWCA Civ 6, [1970] 2 All ER 760, [1970] 1 WLR 1211

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Land, Family

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262771

N v F: FD 11 Mar 2011

The court was asked the ‘vexed’ question of how the court should, when exercising its powers to award ancillary relief, reflect, if at all, the property that H had brought into the marriage back in 1993.

Judges:

Mostyn J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 586 (Fam), [2011] 2 FLR 533

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – S v AG (Financial Remedy: Lottery Prize) FD 14-Oct-2011
The court considered how to treat a lottery win of andpound;500,000 in the context of an ancillary relief application on a divorce.
Held: The answers in such cases must be fact specific. ‘In the application of the sharing principle (as opposed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.431746

T v T (Interception of Documents): FD 5 Aug 1994

W feared that the H would seek to understate the true extent of his resources to the court and so she engaged in a number of activities, including opening and taking letters addressed to him and breaking into his office, with the intention of gathering documentation to enable her to ascertain H’s true financial position. She had disclosed some but not all of the copies she retained.
Held: The fact was to be taken account of in costs order but not to be relied upon as behaviour affecting her entitlements. The wife was wrong to open her Husband’s post looking for evidence in ancillary proceedings, but can copy documents. The wife correctly anticipated H’s failure to disclose his true financial position, and it was ‘reasonable’ to take such photocopies as she could obtain without the use of force and to scour the dustbin. But it was ‘unacceptable’ and ‘reprehensible’ to use force, interception of mail and retention of original documents. Even so, he declined to regard that behaviour as relevant to the amount of the award although it would be relevant to costs.
Wilson J said: ‘The first question, which is not straightforward, is to what extent the wife’s activities in relation to documents were reprehensible. The fact is that the husband had not made a full and frank presentation to the court of his financial resources and that a few of the documents taken by the wife (like the diaries, scrutinised by her and then called for) have enabled this to be made clear. The wife anticipated – and I find that she reasonably anticipated – at the outset of the litigation that the husband would seek to reduce the level of her reward by understating his resources in breach of his duty to the court. On balance, I consider that in those circumstances it was reasonable for the wife to take photocopies of such of the husband’s documents as she could locate without the use of force and, for that matter, to scour the dustbins. But the wife went far beyond that. She (a) used force to obtain documents; (b) intercepted the husband’s mail; and (c) kept original documents.’
Wilson J continued to ask: ‘whether the reprehensible activities of the wife in relation to documents amount to relevant ‘conduct’ or to a relevant ‘circumstance’ within the subsection. I appreciate that it has been held that a spouse’s behaviour in the ancillary litigation, specifically a dishonest failure to make full disclosure, amounts to such conduct a dishonest disclosure will more appropriately be reflected in the inference that the resources are larger than have been disclosed (in which case it will fall within s. 25(2)(a)) and/or in the order for costs; indeed that is how I intend to approach the husband’s disclosure in this case. I am also firmly of the view that the wife’s activity in relation to documents should not be brought into my reckoning of the substantive award, whether as conduct or a circumstance, but should prima facie have some relevance in respect of costs. The extent of their relevance will depend on the potency of other factors. Although the wife’s activities may not have caused significant increase in the costs, the court’s discretion is wife enough to permit their inclusion in its survey of the litigation.’

Judges:

Wilson J

Citations:

Ind Summary 15-Aug-1994, Times 05-Aug-1994, [1994] 2 FLR 1083

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hildebrand v Hildebrand 1992
The parties in ancillary relief proceedings sought orders for discovery. H had been to the wife’s flat surreptitiously on five occasions, and taken photocopies of so many documents obtained by him in the course of those visits (but returned after . .

Cited by:

Cited – L v L and Hughes Fowler Carruthers QBD 1-Feb-2007
The parties were engaged in ancillary relief proceedings. The Husband complained that the wife had sought to use unlawfully obtained information, and in these proceedings sought delivery up of the material from the wife and her solicitors. He said . .
Cited – White v Withers Llp and Dearle CA 27-Oct-2009
The claimant was involved in matrimonial ancillary relief proceedings. His wife was advised by the defendants, her solicitors, to remove his private papers. The claimant now sought permission to appeal against a strike out of his claim against the . .
Cited – Tchenguiz and Others v Imerman CA 29-Jul-2010
Anticipating a refusal by H to disclose assets in ancillary relief proceedings, W’s brothers wrongfully accessed H’s computers to gather information. The court was asked whether the rule in Hildebrand remained correct. W appealed against an order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.89682

Shipman v Shipman: FD 1991

W sought an order under s37 of the 1973 Act restraining H in divorce proceedings from disposing of or dealing with 300,000 pounds, or one half of his severance pay, whichever was the greater, pending determination of the ancillary relief proceedings.
Held: The terms of s37 had not been satisfied. But, relying on Roche, it was wrong to believe that ‘there is no longer any inherent jurisdiction to freeze assets which may be put beyond the reach of the applicant.’ Lincoln J further held: ‘Counsel for the husband urges me to have regard to the many restrictions and safeguards surrounding the use of worldwide Mareva injunctions, and to assimilate the use of, and procedure for, injunctions in the Family Division to those in commercial Law. In my view the matrimonial field calls for a different approach. To my mind the circumstances here call for the injunction to continue. If it were discharged, the husband could well change his intentions, however genuine and well-disposed to the wife his present state of mind may be. Both he and the assets are out of the jurisdiction. Left without a job, and with new responsibilities, he will be faced with a temptation to eat into the whole of the fund.’

Judges:

Lincoln J

Citations:

[1991] 1 FLR 250

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 37

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Roche v Roche CA 1981
. .

Cited by:

Cited – London Borough of Harrow v Johnstone HL 13-Mar-1997
A possession action was lawful against a remaining joint tenant after a notice to terminate the tenancy had been given by the other tenant. An order against interference with possession of property did not extend to matters of the duration of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.564373

Migliaccio v Migliaccio: FD 26 Apr 2016

Wife’s application for a judgment summons against the husband in respect of pounds 2,200 of arrears of child periodical payments and pounds 5,500 in respect of an unpaid costs order.

Judges:

Mr Justice Mostyn

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1055 (Fam), [2016] WLR(D) 245, [2016] 4 WLR 90

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.564180

Regina v R (Inland Revenue: Tax Evasion): FD 1 Jul 1998

The court declined to order the return by the Inland Revenue of documents disclosed to it regarding a husband’s failure to disclose income, where the disclosure was recent and tax payable could affected the order. The wife’s wrongful behaviour in maing the disclosure was to be reflected in court order.

Citations:

Gazette 01-Jul-1998, [1998] 1 FLR 922

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Churchhouse, Regina (on the Application of) v Inland Revenue Admn 4-Apr-2003
The taxpayer was a revenue informer one whose trade is described by Coke as ‘viperous vermin [who] under the reverend mantle of law and justice instituted for protection of the innocent, and the good of the Commonwealth, did vexe and depauperize the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Taxes Management

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.88590

Burrows v Burrows: FD 24 Mar 1999

An award was made for the husband to pay 50% of maximum lump sum and periodical payments of half pension income and other payments. This reflected the wife’s contribution through the marriage, allowing the husband to build his business.

Citations:

Gazette 24-Mar-1999

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25B 25C 25D

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.78762

Goodchild v Goodchild: ChD 13 Dec 1995

The husband and wife had made mirror wills. They divorced, and the husband made a new will. After his death, the child and the third wife of the deceased made a claim against the second wife.
Held: The wills were in identical terms, but nevertheless, fell short of having full and explicit status as mutual wills. Even so they could still create a trust, with a like result. The court granted an order under section 2 of the 1975 Act on the ground that wife’s mistaken belief that the terms of the wills were mutually binding imposed a moral obligation on the deceased. That constituted a special circumstance which exceptionally justified a claim by the son under the Act of 1975. ‘It is also clear from Birmingham v Renfrew . . that these cases of mutual wills are only one example of a wider category of cases, for example secret trusts, in which a court of equity will intervene to impose a constructive trust . . The principle of all these cases is that a court of equity will not permit a person to whom property is transferred by way of gift, but on the faith of an agreement or clear understanding that it is to be dealt with in a particular way for the benefit of a third person, to deal with that property inconsistently with that agreement or understanding.’ and ‘the agreement or understanding must be such as to impose on the donee a legally binding obligation to deal with the property in the particular way and that the other two certainties, namely, those as to the subject matter of the trust and the persons intended to benefit under it, are as essential to this species of trust as they are to any other.’

Judges:

Carnwath J

Citations:

Times 22-Dec-1995, Ind Summary 08-Jan-1996, [1996] 1 WLR 694

Statutes:

Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, Wills Act 1837 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Goodchild and Another v Goodchild CA 2-May-1997
The deceased and his wife made wills in virtually identical form. The husband changed his will after their divorce, but his son and other wife claimed that the couple had intended the wills to be part of a larger arrangement of their affairs, . .
Cited – Birmingham v Renfrew 11-Jun-1937
(High Court of Australia) Cases of mutual wills are only one example of a wider category of cases, for example secret trusts, in which a court of equity will intervene to impose a constructive trust. Latham CJ described a mutual will arrangement as . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Goodchild and Another v Goodchild CA 2-May-1997
The deceased and his wife made wills in virtually identical form. The husband changed his will after their divorce, but his son and other wife claimed that the couple had intended the wills to be part of a larger arrangement of their affairs, . .
Cited – Walters v Olins CA 4-Jul-2008
The claimant appealed against a finding that he had entered into a mutual will contract with the deceased.
Held: It is a legally necessary condition of mutual wills that there is clear and satisfactory evidence of a contract between two . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Family

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.80910

Charman v Charman: CA 20 Dec 2005

The court considered orders to third parties abroad to produce docments for use in ancillary relief proceedings. The husband had built up considerable assets within an offshore discretionary trust. The court was asked whether these were family assets.
Held: Asking what would be the approach of an English court, a request would not be met if it was a fishing expedition, but if only oral evidence was required the question was whether there was reason to believe that he had knowledge of matters relevant to the issues at trial. The letters of request were to be subject to a minor modification, but otherwise the appeal against the order granting it was rejected.

Judges:

Mr Justice Wilson Lord Justice Lloyd Sir Mark Potter President of the Family Division

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1606

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Proceedings Rules 1991 3.1, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25(2)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Browne v Browne CA 1989
The court considered under what circumstances money held in trust for a party could be included within assets to be considered in an application for ancillary relief in family proceedings.
Held: The question is more appropriately expressed as . .
Cited – White v White HL 26-Oct-2000
The couple going through the divorce each had substantial farms and wished to continue farming. It had been a long marriage.
Held: Where a division of the assets of a family would satisfy the reasonable needs of either party on an ancillary . .
Cited – Khanna v Lovell White Durrant (A Firm) ChD 19-Jul-1994
The practice of requiring a third party to produce documents with a subpoena ad duces tecum at an interlocutory stage was a good one and was designed to produce evidence at an earlier stage, reducing costs. No greater inconvenience was suffered by . .
Cited – In re Westinghouse Uranium Contract HL 1978
‘The fact, if it be so, that evidence so obtained may be used in other proceedings and indeed may be central in those proceedings is no reason for refusing to allow it to be requested’ Lord Fraser said: ‘in judging the nature of the letters rogatory . .
Cited – In re Asbestos Insurance Coverage HL 1985
A London insurance brokerage company had been ordered to produce documents pursuant to a letter of request issued by a Californian court in proceedings brought by manufacturers of asbestos against their insurers. The 1975 Act empowered the court to . .
Cited – In re State of Norway’s Application (No 1) CA 1987
There were taxation proceedings in Norway. One question was whether the Norwegian taxpayer controlled a trust which owned some shares. Letters rogatory issued by the Norwegian Court requested the oral examination of two witnesses in the United . .
Cited – In re State of Norway’s application (Nos 1 and 2) HL 1989
The House considered an application by a foreign state seeking assistance in obtaining evidence here to be used in enforcing its own revenue laws at home.
Held: Rule 3 of the Convention encapsulated a ‘fundamental rule of English Law’, but did . .
Cited – Panayiotou and Others v Sony Music Entertainment (UK) Ltd ChD 21-Jul-1993
The rules do not limit the inherent jurisdiction of the court to make requests to foreign courts to ensure the production of documents from abroad. There is no logical reason why the principles by reference to which the court determines whether, and . .
Cited – Netbank v Commercial Money Center 2004
(Supreme Court of Bermuda) Before the court was an issue as to the enforcement of a letter of request from Ohio for oral evidence to be taken from employees in Bermuda of an insurance company. The island’s Evidence Act 1905 had provisions identical . .
Cited – Letterstedt v Broers PC 22-Mar-1884
(Supreme Court of the Cape of Good Hope) Lack of harmony may be of itself a good reason for a trustee to resign or be dismissed. Lord Blackburn approved a passage in Story’s Equity Jurisprudence, s 1289: ‘But in cases of positive misconduct, courts . .
Cited – Morgan v Morgan 1977
In ancillary relied proceedings the wife’s father was ordered to disclose his testamentary intentions toward his daughter.
Held: Such an order was oppressive, and he should be protected against it. . .
Cited – Parra v Parra CA 20-Dec-2002
The court considered the division of family assets on an ancillary relief application where a family company assets were involved but the assets had been divided equally: ‘The parties have, perhaps unusually, ordered their affairs during the . .
Cited – Zakay v Zakay 1998
In financial proceedings in England following divorce the wife alleged – and the husband denied – that he was the beneficial owner of shares held by a Gibraltarian trust company. The English court had ordered the issue of a letter of request to the . .
Cited – D v D (Production Appointment) FD 29-Nov-1995
An accountant’s professional privilege was overborne by the court, and a wider disclosure was approved. The court set a wide boundary around the scope of the documents which he was ordering the wife’s accountant to produce: ‘If the boundary is set . .
Cited – B v B (Matrimonial Proceedings: Discovery) CA 1978
The wife applied for ancillary relief, and sought disclosure from a third party.
Held: Whilst a party must disclose all documents in his possession, custody or power the court has a discretion whether to order inspection. ‘Custody’ in RSC Ord . .
Cited – Frary v Frary CA 1993
A spouse’s wealthy cohabitant, who had been ordered to produce evidence not just as to the support provided by her (or him) to the spouse but as to her (or his) overall resources may be able successfully to invoke the courts jurisdiction to protect . .

Cited by:

See Also – Charman v Charman (No 2) FD 27-Jul-2006
Ancillary relief claim – very substantial assets. The court provided for a possible substantial debt by a reverse contingent lump sum. . .
See Also – Charman v Charman CA 11-Dec-2006
Ancillary relief – substantial assets – application by the respondent wife in relation to an appeal by the appellant husband from a judgment and order in ancillary relief proceedings. The judge ordered the husband to pay pounds 40 million to the . .
See Also – Charman v Charman (No 4) CA 24-May-2007
The court considered what property should be considered in an ancillary relief claim on divorce, and said: ‘To what property does the sharing principle apply? The answer might well have been that it applies only to matrimonial property, namely the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236566

CF v Secretary of State for the Home Department: FD 30 Jan 2004

The court considered the choice or procedures arising in relation to a baby ward of court living with its mother in prison. The sentence to be served would take the child beyond the maximum age provided for in mother and baby units.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 111 (Fam), [2004] 2 FLR 517

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prison Rules 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Practice Direction (Family Proceedings: Court Bundles) 10-Mar-2000
There should at be lodged with the court a summary of the background to the hearing; a statement of the issue or issues to be determined; a summary of the order or directions sought by each party; a chronology; and skeleton arguments. . .

Cited by:

Cited – E v Channel Four, News International Ltd and St Helens Borough Council FD 1-Jun-2005
The applicant sought an order restraining publication by the defendants of material, saying she did not have capacity to consent to the publication. She suffered a multiple personality disorder. She did herself however clearly wish the film to be . .
Cited – Re A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice, Prisons

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231166

Ellis v Ellis: CA 24 Jun 2005

The defendant appealed a suspended committal order in respect of his failure to pay maintenance. The husband had unilaterally reduced payments at the same time as withdrawing his application to vary the order.
Held: The defendant simply piled assertion upon assertion and without any evidence. The judge’s decision was precisely correct.

Judges:

Jacob LJ, Wall LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 853

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Debtors Act 1869

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Mubarak v Mubarak FD 30-Nov-2000
In ancillary relief proceedings, where a respondent company director conceded that the assets and income of a company could be treated as his own, it could be proper to draw aside the veil of incorporation. Nevertheless the court should be careful . .
Cited – Mubarak v Mubarak CA 2001
A judgment summons, issued was issued by the wife to enforce a lump sum order made against her husband in their divorce proceedings. The judge had performed his statutory duty which included having to satisfy himself under s. 25 of the 1973 Act of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Rundell v Rundell CA 14-Dec-2005
The former husband appealed an order for his committal to prison on a judgment summons in default of clearing arrears of maintenance payments. He said that the proceedings were criminal in nature and offended his rights to a fair trial under the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228915

Messer v Messer: CA 19 Jan 2005

Possession of house after breakdown of relationship

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 63

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – T Messer and Another v Messer CA 21-Dec-2004
Order for possession . .

Cited by:

See Also – T Messer and Another v Messer CA 21-Dec-2004
Order for possession . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Family

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222594

State of The Netherlands v Reed: ECJ 17 Apr 1986

1. Article 10(1) of regulation no 1612/68 cannot be interpreted as meaning that the companion, in a stable relationship, of a worker who is a national of a member state and is employed in the territory of another member state must in certain circumstances be treated as his ‘spouse’ for the purposes of that provision.
2. The possibility for a migrant worker of obtaining permission for his unmarried companion to reside with him, where that companion is not a national of the host member state, can assist his integration in the host state and thus contribute to the achievement of freedom of movement for workers. Consequently, that possibility must be regarded as falling within the concept of a social advantage for the purposes of article 7(2) of Regulation no 1612/68.
It must therefore be concluded that a member state which grants such an advantage to its own nationals cannot refuse to grant it to workers who are nationals of other member states without being guilty of discrimination on grounds of nationality, contrary to articles 7 and 48 of the treaty.

Citations:

R-59/85, [1986] EUECJ R-59/85, [1987] 2 CMLR 448, [1986] ECR 1283

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Family

Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.215432

Nayler and Another v Beard: CA 24 Jul 2001

Application for permission to appeal against an order made in civil non-matrimonial proceeding. The appeal raises questions as to the circumstances in which affidavits of means sworn by a party in matrimonial proceedings may be the subject of disclosure and inspection in separate civil proceedings to which he is a party and as to the identity of the court which should be asked to resolve any such issue.

Judges:

Hale LJ, Wilson J

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1201, [2001] 2 FLR 1346, [2001] CP Rep 104, [2001] 3 FCR 61, [2001] Fam Law 801

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Family

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201269

Maskell v Maskell: CA 8 May 2001

Ancillary relief application

Judges:

Thorpe LJ, Bell J

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 858, [2003] 1 FLR 1138.

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Martin-Dye v Martin-Dye CA 25-May-2006
The court was asked how to achieve fairness in ancillary relief proceedings on a divorce as respects pension entitlements. The parties had sufficient to allow a clean break, but the assets mixture included sums invested which would be returned only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.201066

Martin v Martin: CA 10 Mar 1977

The court urged caution in a judge using his own experience of the property market by way of judicial notice: ‘[W]herever it is to be argued that the wife could find alternative accommodation for herself out of her share of the equity, whatever that may be . . there should be evidence put before the court to that effect. The unsupported assertions and speculations which are made in the course of argument in these cases are not satisfactory. It means the court has to use its own imprecise knowledge of the property market and may well make mistakes. So if it is going to be said that the wife could get alternative accommodation, let there be some evidence to that effect. Otherwise it will have to be assumed that it is not possible.’ The court upheld the right of a wife to remain indefinitely in a very modest matrimonial home against the claim of her former husband that it should be sold and the proceeds equally divided: ‘I appreciate the point he (Mr Aglionby, counsel for the husband) has made, namely that it is difficult for practitioners to advise clients in these cases because the rules are not very firm. That is inevitable when the courts are working out the exercise of the wide powers given by a statute like the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. It is the essence of such a discretionary situation that the court should preserve, so far as it can, the utmost elasticity to deal with each case on its own facts. Therefore, it is a matter of trial and error and imagination on the part of those advising clients. It equally means that decisions of this court can never be better than guidelines. They are not precedents in the strict sense of the word. There is bound to be an element of uncertainty in the use of the wide discretionary powers given to the court under the 1973 Act, and no doubt there always will be, because as social circumstances change so the court will have to adapt the ways in which it exercises discretion. If property suddenly became available all over the country many of the rationes decidendi of the past would be quite inappropriate’

Judges:

Ormrod LJ, Stamp LJ, Sir John Pennycuick

Citations:

[1978] Fam 12, [1977] EWCA Civ 7

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Mesher v Mesher and Hall CA 1973
(Heard in 1973, but reported in 1980) The court gave a form of ancillary relief order allowing the party with custody of the children (even though both had remarried) to remain in the matrimonial home with them, the house only being sold on the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Piglowska v Piglowski HL 24-Jun-1999
No Presumption of House for both Parties
When looking to the needs of parties in a divorce, there is no presumption that both parties are to be left able to purchase alternative homes. The order of sub-clauses in the Act implies nothing as to their relative importance. Courts should be . .
Cited – McFarlane v McFarlane; Parlour v Parlour CA 7-Jul-2004
Appeals were made against orders for periodical payments made against high earning husbands. The argument was that if the case of White had decided that capital should be distributed equally, the same should apply also to income.
Held: The . .
Cited – Miller v Miller; M v M (Short Marriage: Clean Break) CA 29-Jul-2005
The parties contested ancillary relief where there had been only a short marriage, but where here were considerable family assets available for division. The wife sought to rely upn the husband’s behaviour to counter any argument as to the shortness . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.197923

Gojkovic v Gojkovic (No 2): CA 1 Apr 1991

In ancillary relief proceedings, the husband had not made frank disclosure of his assets. The final Calderbank offer of andpound;600,000 was made only the day before the substantive hearing. The offer was rejected. The judge awarded the wife a lump sum of andpound;1 million. The judge made no order as to costs after the date when the wife’s solicitors had rejected an earlier, lower, offer by the husband. From that date both sides had acted reasonably. The wife appealed. No counter-offer had been made by the wife.
Held: The starting point, is that costs prima facie follow the event but in family cases this rule may be displaced more easily, and it is unusual to order costs in children cases. For financial relief the applicant has to make the application in order to obtain an order. Orders by consent; usually include the applicant’s costs. If contested and the applicant succeeds, where money available and no special factors, the applicant spouse is likely to obtain an order for costs. The behaviour of one party, such as in material non-disclosure of documents, may be a material factor. In some few cases the assets are substantial and an order for costs can (if appropriate) be made. The court rules reflect the need for Calderbank offers, subject to conditions, to have teeth. The respondent must make a serious offer worthy of consideration. If he does so, the applicant should accept or reject the offer and make clear any counter-offer. Both should negotiate. There is a very wide discretion in the court in awarding costs. Many reasons may affect costs including material non-disclosure, and delay or excessive zeal. The need to use all the available money to house the spouse and children of the family may be constraints. It would be inappropriate to constrain that wide of discretion. But the starting point in a case where there has been an offer is that, prima facie, if the applicant receives no more or less than the offer made, she/he is at risk not only of not being awarded costs, but also of paying the costs of the other party after communication of the offer and a reasonable time to consider it. ‘I cannot, for my part, see why there is any difference in principle between the position of a party who fails to obtain an order equal to the offer made and pays the costs, and a party who fails by the offer to meet the award made by the court. In the latter case prima facie costs should follow the event, as they would do in a payment into court, with the proviso that other factors in the Family Division may alter that prima facie position.’
Russell LJ: ‘In his opening submissions to this court, counsel for the husband invited us to lay down guidelines which would, he said, be of assistance to those charged with the responsibility of deciding what, after divorce, is the appropriate level of lump sum payments in cases where very substantial capital assets are available. I do not think that such an exercise is possible. The guidelines already exist. Section 23 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 is the enabling provision for an order for the payment of a lump sum. Section 25, as amended by the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, in terms, requires the court to have regard to all the circumstances of the case and subsection (2), under no less than eight sub-paragraphs, sets out the matters to which the court in particular shall have regard.
In the individual case, some of those matters will assume greater importance than others and, indeed, the facts of this case well illustrate that proposition. In my judgment in this case we are concerned with a wholly exceptional set of circumstances . . . . ‘

Judges:

Butler-Sloss LJ, Russell LJ

Citations:

[1991] 2 FLR 233, [1992] Fam 40, Times 01-May-1991, [1992] 1 All ER 267

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Calderbank v Calderbank CA 5-Jun-1975
Letter Without Prejudice Save as to Costs
Husband and wife disputed provision under 1973 Act, and a summons under section 17 of the 1882 Act. The wife had offered to transfer a house to H occupied by his mother, worth about pounds 12,000, in return for him leaving the matrimonial home. He . .
Cited – Singer (formerly Sharegin) v Sharegin 1984
In family proceedings, the starting point for the award of costs is that they prima facie follow the event but that presumption may be displaced much more easily than, and in circumstances which would not apply, in other divisions of the High Court. . .
Cited – McDonnell v McDonnell CA 1977
In family proceedings, a costs letter had been written in the form suggested in Calderbank.
Held: The court accepted and endorsed the practice suggested by Cairns LJ. Ormrod LJ said: ‘The important factor which distinguishes this case is the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Butcher v Wolfe and Another CA 30-Oct-1998
The parties had been partners in a family farm. On dissolution there was a dispute as to apportionment of costs. An offer had been ‘without prejudice save as to costs’.
Held: Costs may be denied to a plaintiff who had received a Calderbank . .
Cited – Norris v Norris, Haskins v Haskins CA 28-Jul-2003
The court considered how orders for costs were to be made in ‘big money’ cases.
Held: There were two sets of rules. Cases should be considered by first applying the Civil Procedure Rules. This would allow the court to consider the full range . .
Cited – Corner House Research, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry CA 1-Mar-2005
The applicant sought to bring an action to challenge new rules on approval of export credit guarantees. The company was non-profit and founded to support investigation of bribery. It had applied for a protected costs order to support the . .
Cited – In re T (Children) SC 25-Jul-2012
The local authority had commenced care proceedings, alleging abuse. After lengthy proceedings, of seven men and two grandparents, all but one were exonerated. The grandparents had not been entitled to legal aid, and had had to mortgage their house . .
Cited – Re S (A Child) SC 25-Mar-2015
The Court was asked as to the proper approach to ordering the unsuccessful party to pay the costs of a successful appeal in cases about the care and upbringing of children. It arises in the specific context of a parent’s successful appeal to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Costs

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.182186

Roy Green v Vivia Green: PC 20 May 2003

PC (Jamaica) The claimant sought a declaration that he was entitled to one half of the marriage assets on divorce. They had each acquired various properties and assets both in Jamaica and the USA. The judge at first instance had found for an equal share, and he now appealed a finding on appeal that he was entitled only to a one third share.
Held: An appellate court must interfere in a judge’s finding only if he was clearly in error. That could not be shown here, and te judge’s order was restored.

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Millett, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

[2003] UKPC 39

Links:

Bailii, PC

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Citing:

Cited – Gissing v Gissing HL 7-Jul-1970
Evidence Needed to Share Benefical Inerests
The family home had been purchased during the marriage in the name of the husband only. The wife asserted that she had a beneficial interest in it.
Held: The principles apply to any case where a beneficial interest in land is claimed by a . .
Cited – Grant v Edwards and Edwards CA 24-Mar-1986
A couple were not married but lived together in Vincent Farmhouse in which the plaintiff claimed a beneficial interest on separation. The female partner was told by the male partner that the only reason for not acquiring the property in joint names . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182236

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 had been given, and the concept under the Act of ‘treatment together’. Any interference with the right to family life was proportionate and necessary.

Judges:

The President

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 259 (QB), Gazette 01-May-2003, [2003] 1 FLR 1091

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Family Law Act 1986 55A, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 28 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – U v W (Attorney-General Intervening) FD 4-Mar-1997
The restriction on the freedom to provide human fertility treatment to licensees of the Authority was not a breach of the EU treaty. There is a particular need for certainty in provisions affecting the status of a child. There is a mental element . .
Cited – Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
Cited – Marckx v Belgium ECHR 13-Jun-1979
Recognition of illegitimate children
The complaint related to the manner in which parents were required to adopt their own illegitimate child in order to increase his rights. Under Belgian law, no legal bond between an unmarried mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth. . .
Cited – Kroon And Others v The Netherlands ECHR 27-Oct-1994
Neither marriage nor living together were necessarily a requirement for establishing family ties, exceptionally other factors may . . serve to demonstrate that a relationship has sufficient constancy to create de facto ‘family ties’. The . .
Cited – Re B (Parentage) FD 1996
A mother applied for financial provision for her twin children under 1989 Act Sch 1. The father asked whether he was their parent within the Schedule. They had been born by artificial insemination. He accepted that he was the donor of the sperm and . .
Cited – Regina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB CA 6-Feb-1997
At the applicant’s request samples of sperm were taken from her husband hours prior to his death, when he was in a coma.
Held: Sperm cannot lawfully be taken from a comatose man in order later to allow his surviving wife to be artificially . .
Cited – McMichael v United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-1995
In the course of care proceedings, medical and social services’ reports were disclosed to the courts, but not to the parents involved.
Held: The courts’ failure to show reports to the parents in care proceedings was a breach of the Convention. . .
Cited – Re H; Re G (Adoption: Consultation of Unmarried Fathers) CA 2001
Not every natural father has a right to respect for his family life with regard to every child of whom he may be the father (see also McMichael v United Kingdom (1995) 20 EHRR 205). The application of Art 8(1) will depend upon the facts of each . .
Cited – Re S (Freeing for Adoption) CA 2002
If parliament always foresaw what possibilities might arise, courts would never have anything to interpret. . .
Cited – Mrs U v Centre for Reproductive Medicine CA 2002
The 1990 Act lays great emphasis upon consent. Scientific techniques developed since the first IVF baby open up the possibility of creating human life in quite new ways bringing huge practical and ethical difficulties. These have to be balanced . .
Cited – Mikulic v Croatia ECHR 7-Feb-2002
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 13 with regard to the complaint under Article 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13 with regard to the . .
Cited – Re R (A Child) CA 19-Feb-2003
. .
Cited – Regina (Rose and Another) v Secretary of State for Health and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Admn 26-Jul-2002
Applications were made, challenging the refusal of the Secretary of State for Health, and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, to institute a system where a child born by artificial insemination could make enquiries as to his or her . .
Cited – Johansen v Norway ECHR 7-Aug-1996
The court had to consider a permanent placement of a child with a view to adoption in oposition to the natural parents’ wishes.
Held: Particular weight should be attached to the best interests of the child, which may override those of the . .
See also – Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v Mr and Mrs A, YA, ZA, Mr and Mrs B T Authority QBD 4-Nov-2002
At a fertility clinic, eggs were fertilised with the sperm from the wrong father. It was noticed only because after the birth of the twins, the colour of their skin was different from the mother and putative father.
Held: Difficult issues of . .

Cited by:

See also – Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v Mr and Mrs A, YA, ZA, Mr and Mrs B T Authority QBD 4-Nov-2002
At a fertility clinic, eggs were fertilised with the sperm from the wrong father. It was noticed only because after the birth of the twins, the colour of their skin was different from the mother and putative father.
Held: Difficult issues of . .
Cited – Quintavalle v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority HL 28-Apr-2005
The parents of a boy suffering a serious genetic disorder sought IVF treament in which any embryo would be tested for its pre-implantation genetic status. Only an embryo capable of producing the stem cells necessary to cure the boy would be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179570

Wermuth v Wermuth: CA 4 Feb 2003

The husband had commenced proceedings for divorce in Germany. The husband was German, and the wife became German upon the marriage, but they had lived in London. The wife was second to issue, beginning proceedings in London. The district judge recorded the parties’ agreement that the German court should be seized, save of article 12 matters. The wife obtained an ancillary relief maintenance order, which the husband now appealed.
Held: The maintenance order was an unwarranted invasion of the jurisdiction of the German court. It was not protective, and nor was the case urgent. Brussels II has no direct application to ancillary relief claims. It was wrong for an English court to seek to usurp the Convention. Substantial sums had been spent on legal costs unnecessarily in London.

Judges:

Thorpe, Latham, LJJ, Lawrence Collins J

Citations:

Times 07-Feb-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 50, [2003] 1 WLR 942

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation No 1347/2000/EC (OJ 2000 L160/19) 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Jurisdiction, European

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179018

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

Mordant v Hallas: ChD 2 Aug 1993

A debt due which consisted of a matrimonial lump sum order is not provable in a bankruptcy.

Citations:

Gazette 02-Aug-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – In re Mordant CA 1996
The court discussed the interplay of family and insolvency proceedings: ‘Since the wife is unable to prove in the husband’s bankruptcy, the position . . is that the husband’s trustee must use the andpound;385,000 in paying the trustee’s expenses . .

Cited by:

Appeal From – In re Mordant CA 1996
The court discussed the interplay of family and insolvency proceedings: ‘Since the wife is unable to prove in the husband’s bankruptcy, the position . . is that the husband’s trustee must use the andpound;385,000 in paying the trustee’s expenses . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Family

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.83826

Harris v Harris: CA 8 Nov 2001

On an application by a contemnor to be purged of his contempt, the judge could only answer ‘Yes’, ‘No’, or ‘Not Yet.’ It was not right to add further complexity to release the contemnor, but with some further part of his sentence suspended. The powers of the court in such applications need to be clear and simple.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Mantell

Citations:

Times 19-Nov-2001, Gazette 10-Jan-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1645, [2002] Fam 253, [2002] 1 All ER 185, [2001] 3 FCR 640, [2002] Fam Law 93, [2002] 2 WLR 747, [2002] 1 FLR 248

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Overruled – Harris v Harris; Harris v Attorney General FD 21-May-2001
The applicant had been committed for ten months for contempt, being in breach of family court injunctions. He applied to be released after two months on the basis that the unserved balance of the sentence be suspended. The court held that it had the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Family

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166836

Griffin v Griffin: CA 7 Apr 2000

It was not wrong to make an order suspending commitment for contempt of court provided he complied with another order which had been made without any limit of time. The power to commit remains a common law power with statutory restrictions. An order can be valid and within the judge’s discretion even if it is one which should not normally be made.

Citations:

Times 28-Apr-2000, Gazette 18-May-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 119

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Contempt of Court

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147152