Cases Archive

The issue for determination was whether a consent order providing for temporary leave to remove a child from the jurisdiction was final and brought proceedings to an end. The Court of Appeal held that this question should be determined as things stood at the time the order was made and could not depend on what happened next in the family’s life or even on what would be a sensible and practical way of going about things. Appeal dismissed.

Final hearing of a father’s application for contact – Pauffley J orders no direct contact.

Appeal against a decision that there had been material non-disclosure during the course of an appeal. Consideration of the circumstances in which a court may, on the grounds of material non-disclosure, set aside an order for financial provision following divorce.

The mother appealed against registration and enforcement of a French order granting sole residence to the father. Consideration of the effect of Article 23(c) of Brussels II Revised when French service rules complied with and Annex II certificate granted but actual service had not been effected. Appeal allowed.

Care proceedings brought in relation to a child whose father had killed her mother. Issues in the case: whether the child should continue to reside in foster care under the auspices of a Care Order; and the arrangements for contact between the child and her grandparents.

Local Authority criticised by the Judge for its conduct in care proceedings, which conclude by way of a Supervision Order and a Residence Order for the child to live with the father.

Father appealed successfully against the making of Care and Placement Orders on the basis that the judge at first instance had failed to base that decision on proper evidence and reason sufficiently in her judgment. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal considered, in what was a highly fact-specific scenario, that the circuit judge was wrong not to direct a further assessment of the father in light of his change of circumstances. Appeal unanimously allowed and costs ordered in favour of the Appellant father.

Final hearing of private law proceedings, which had the involvement of two local authorities and the children being represented by their Guardian. The Court made a Shared Residence Order and Supervision Order, finding the threshold criteria to be crossed. Finally, the Court made an Order by consent pursuant to s.91(14) Children Act 1989, preventing either parent from making a further application in respect of the child for two years without the Court’s permission.