Successful appeal against findings of fact made by the court at first instance, where the trial judge was criticised for not applying the correct test for the identification of perpetrators of significant harm. The case raises an important principle about the proper approach to take when identifying perpetrators and the risk of effectively reversing the burden of proof
The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order in financial remedy proceedings directly against a discretionary trust, of which the husband was a potential beneficiary, to make a lump sum payment to the wife. The judge had had no power under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 s.23(1) to make such an order against a third party.
Jay Banerji led by Sarah Morgan QC acted for the mother in this fact-finding involving allegations of forced marriage, FGM, and physical abuse. Wardship proceedings ran alongside the forced marriage application brought by the Chief Constable.
Joan Connell represented the respondent local authority in proceedings in which the Appellant Mother successfully appealed a refusal for an adjournment for six months at a final hearing. At the time of the final hearing L, was 7 months old. M was a recovering alcoholic who sought further time to demonstrate abstinence and insight into the concerns of the local authority regarding her honesty and ability to work with professionals in the event of a future relapse. The court at first instance refused the application for an adjournment and made care and placement orders. On appeal the final orders were set aside, the adjournment granted and the case set down for a further hearing. The President’s guidance in Re S Child  EWHC was considered.
The leading authority in respect of the reliability of hair strand testing for drugs and how the results of hair tests should be interpreted by practitioners. Ronan O’Donovan appeared on behalf of Lextox, one of the laboratories intervening in ongoing care proceedings where the issue of the mother’s use of drugs was called into dispute by a trichologist. Peter Jackson J held that the variability of findings from hair strand testing does not call into question the underlying science, but underlines the need to treat numerical data with proper caution.
The Local Authority had applied for a Secure Accommodation Order in respect of a 14-year-old boy. This high-profile judgment, delivered in open court, attracted the attention of national media and focuses on the unavailability of placements for a child in secure accommodation.
Mrs Justice Roberts dismisses Wife’s attack of a trust owning shares in companies worth £50m