Cases Archive

The mother appealed against the decision of a circuit judge, following a fact-finding hearing, to relax the restrictions around the father’s contact to the child, such as to allow the father contact at his home. The mother asserted that the court at first instance had exercised its discretion wrongfully and prematurely. Delivering the lead judgment of the Court of Appeal, Black LJ held that the appeal could only succeed if it could be shown that there had been a wrong exercise of discretion. The mother had failed to demonstrate that the judge had erred or that the decision of the court at first instance was beyond the ambit of its discretion. Appeal unanimously dismissed.

Disclosure — Serious sexual abuse allegations against the father — Contact with child suspended — Accuser suffered poor mental and physical health — Whether the balance fell in favour of disclosure

The Court considered whether an occupation order amounted to a maintenance order and the court was thus prohibited from making one under Brussels IIR.

Application for permission to appeal and, if granted, appeal against a decision not to hold a fact-finding hearing in an application for contact where there were historic convictions for domestic violence. Permission granted but appeal refused.

Application for permission to remove a child to India temporarily for the purpose of a wedding

Application to transfer proceedings in relation to a child from the Hague to the High Court in London pursuant to Article 15(2)(c) Brussels II bis in light of ongoing matrimonial and financial remedy proceedings in the English courts. Application summarily dismissed.

Appeal relating to the length of sentence imposed in respect of breaches of a non-molestation order to which a power of arrest was attached

Father’s application for permission to appeal against the decision of a circuit judge, who refused to permit him to make an application for the implementation of an order for indirect contact with the children during the currency of an order made by a different judge under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989. He also sought an order that NYAS (National Youth Advocacy Service) be appointed as the children’s Guardian. Application refused.