Christopher Miller

Christopher is instructed to act on behalf of parents and children in the most complex of private law disputes, often involving alleged alienation and/or serious allegations of parental abuse. He has extensive experience of litigation concerning the proposed permanent international relocation of children.

Recent Cases of Note

Re B [2022]

Christopher acted for the surviving siblings in an unusual case where their mother opposed their father having knowledge of the whereabouts of, and visiting, the earthly remains of their deceased infant sibling.

M v M [2021]

Long running case where a father (for whom Christopher acted) was accused of coercive and controlling behaviour towards the mother of the child. No findings were made and, indeed, the mother was criticised for covertly recording the father as a means of controlling him. Arrangements in respect of the child remained bitterly contested, but were ultimately resolved with a shared care arrangement. CAFCASS were criticised by the Judge for pre-judging issues and failing to report discriminatory views expressed by the mother against the father in interview.

AB v CD [2021] EWHC 375 (Fam)

Application for summary return to Italy under the Hague Convention. Christopher secured the summary return of the child to the jurisdiction from which he was abducted. The Court gave guidance as to the applicability of Article 11(4) of B(II)R in cases which had commenced prior to the end, but concluded after the end, of the UK/EU withdrawal transition period.

Christopher regularly appears on behalf of local authorities, parents and children’s guardians in cases involving complex expert medical evidence and/or disputed scientific evidence. He also has a particular interest in public law cases which have an interface with immigration or international issues.

Recent Cases of Note

Re JC (A minor) 2020-2021

Christopher Miller (leading Madeleine Whelan) was instructed on behalf of a child and his Children’s Guardian in a 7 week fact-finding hearing. The child had suffered a highly unusual and catastrophic pattern of injuries. The Court received evidence from experts from a broad range of disciplines (including two surgeons who specialised in different fields).  The outcome stage of proceedings was also highly complex, involving consideration of whether or not the child (who had significant additional needs arising from his experiences) should be placed out of the jurisdiction at this stage or whether a ‘contingent’ care plan for placement abroad should be put in place.

Re JH (A child) March 2018

Christopher Miller represented the father of a child who had suffered significant intra-cranial and spinal bleeding linked with hypoxic-ischaemic brain damage and retinal haemorrhages. There was a consensus between 6 experts at an experts’ meeting that the child’s presentation was most likely as a result of an inflicted shaking or impact type injury. However, the parents’ team were able to identify features of the pathology which indicated that it was just as likely to have been caused by a combination of birth processes, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and a spinal abnormality. The local authority withdrew the case half way through the fact-finding hearing and the child was returned to the parents’ care shortly thereafter.

Re A (Children) [2020] EWCA Civ 448

Court of Appeal confirms the test for disclosure of material in care proceedings to the police to further investigations into criminal offences.

LA Council v B [2023] [citation pending]

Judgment concerning whether or not a young mother who wished to keep her pregnancy secret from her family should be permitted to place the child for adoption without exploration of whether or not family members could offer the child a permanent home. Christopher acted on behalf of the mother and was successful in securing the confidentiality of the adoption in the face of united professional opposition to the same.

Christopher regularly represents high net worth clients and appears in cases that involve issues such as foreign assets, trusts, nuptial agreements, linked POCA proceedings and complex business assets.

Recent Cases of Note

L v L October 2018

Matrimonial finance case involving a British Virgin Islands Trust owned by a Hong Kong Trustee. Complex issues involving the tax consequences of de-enveloping part or all of the trust in addition to whether or not the trust was a sham and, if not a sham, whether or not it was a nuptial settlement capable of being varied.

McN c McN and B v McN March 2017

Christopher represented the majority ultimate owner (through various offshore legal entities) of an oil brokerage company in actions brought against him under schedule 1 of CA 1989 by the mother of his youngest child and matrimonial finance proceedings brought by his ex-wife at a time when the multi-million dollar sale of his oil brokerage company in tranches was pending. Complex issues arose concerning the balancing of risk arising from aggressive taxation planning, currency fluctuation and contingent pricing of tranches of the company depending on future performance.

B v B [2022]

Christopher (lead by Michael Glaser KC) acted in a matrimonial finance case concerning a multi-million-pound farming, residential and commercial property business. Questions of inherited wealth, matrimonial/non-matrimonial assets and mingling were central to the issues.

Christopher has been interested in the international movement of children and the conflict of laws from the outset of his career. He has represented clients in reported cases concerning the Hague Convention (abduction of children), Brussels II Revised (when in force) and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations at both High Court and Court of Appeal level.

LA Council v B [2023] [citation pending] Judgment concerning whether or not a young mother who wished to keep her pregnancy secret from her family should be permitted to place the child for adoption without exploration of whether or not family members could offer the child a permanent home. Christopher acted on behalf of the mother and was successful in securing the confidentiality of the adoption in the face of united professional opposition to the same.

Re B [2022] Christopher acted for the surviving siblings in an unusual case where their mother opposed their father having knowledge of the whereabouts of, and visiting, the earthly remains of their deceased infant sibling.

B v B [2022] Christopher (lead by Michael Glaser KC) acted in a matrimonial finance case concerning a multi-million-pound farming, residential and commercial property business. Questions of inherited wealth, matrimonial/non-matrimonial assets and mingling were central to the issues.

M v M [2021] Long running case where a father (for whom Christopher acted) was accused of coercive and controlling behaviour towards the mother of the child. No findings were made and, indeed, the mother was criticised for covertly recording the father as a means of controlling him. Arrangements in respect of the child remained bitterly contested, but were ultimately resolved with a shared care arrangement. CAFCASS were criticised by the Judge for pre-judging issues and failing to report discriminatory views expressed by the mother against the father in interview.

AB v CD [2021] EWHC 375 (Fam) Application for summary return to Italy under the Hague Convention. Christopher secured the summary return of the child to the jurisdiction from which he was abducted. The Court gave guidance as to the applicability of Article 11(4) of B(II)R in cases which had commenced prior to the end, but concluded after the end, of the UK/EU withdrawal transition period.

Re JC (A minor) 2020-2021 Christopher Miller (leading Madeleine Whelan) was instructed on behalf of a child and his Children’s Guardian in a 7 week fact-finding hearing. The child had suffered a highly unusual and catastrophic pattern of injuries. The Court received evidence from experts from a broad range of disciplines (including two surgeons who specialised in different fields).  The outcome stage of proceedings was also highly complex, involving consideration of whether or not the child (who had significant additional needs arising from his experiences) should be placed out of the jurisdiction at this stage or whether a ‘contingent’ care plan for placement abroad should be put in place.

Re A (Children) [2020] EWCA Civ 448 Court of Appeal confirms the test for disclosure of material in care proceedings to the police to further investigations into criminal offences.

L v L October 2018 Matrimonial finance case involving a British Virgin Islands Trust owned by a Hong Kong Trustee. Complex issues involving the tax consequences of de-enveloping part or all of the trust in addition to whether or not the trust was a sham and, if not a sham, whether or not it was a nuptial settlement capable of being varied.

Re JH (A child) March 2018 Christopher Miller represented the father of a child who had suffered significant intra-cranial and spinal bleeding linked with hypoxic-ischaemic brain damage and retinal haemorrhages. There was a consensus between 6 experts at an experts’ meeting that the child’s presentation was most likely as a result of an inflicted shaking or impact type injury. However, the parents’ team were able to identify features of the pathology which indicated that it was just as likely to have been caused by a combination of birth processes, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and a spinal abnormality. The local authority withdrew the case half way through the fact-finding hearing and the child was returned to the parents’ care shortly thereafter.

McN c McN and B v McN March 2017 Christopher represented the majority ultimate owner (through various offshore legal entities) of an oil brokerage company in actions brought against him under schedule 1 of CA 1989 by the mother of his youngest child and matrimonial finance proceedings brought by his ex-wife at a time when the multi-million dollar sale of his oil brokerage company in tranches was pending. Complex issues arose concerning the balancing of risk arising from aggressive taxation planning, currency fluctuation and contingent pricing of tranches of the company depending on future performance.

Re CB (No. 3) (Adoption and Children Act 2002) [2015] EWHC 3274 (Fam) Christopher Miller represented the Local Authority in the third reported judgment in these proceedings.  Here, Moylan J deals with the proposed adopters’ application for an Adoption Order, which was opposed by the mother – supported by representations made on behalf of the Latvian authorities.  The application was granted.

Re CB (A Child) (No. 2) (Adoption Proceedings: Vienna Convention) [2016] 1 FLR 1286, [2016] 2 WLR 470 The Court of Appeal provides definitive guidance on issues relating to the interface between ECHR Law, BIIa, the Vienna Convention and domestic adoption jurisprudence. The Latvian Ministry of Justice intervened in the appeal in opposition to the Local Authority and in support of the mother. The mother’s appeal was dismissed.  Christopher Miller represented the Local Authority.

Re CB (A Child) (No. 1) (Adoption Application: Permission To Oppose) [2016] 1 FLR 1261 Christopher Miller represented the Local Authority in an application, made by the mother, for permission to oppose an adoption.  The mother, supported by the Latvian authorities, applied for a transfer of the proceedings to the Latvian court under Art 15 Brussels II Revised, permission to oppose the adoption and contact.  All three applications were refused by Moylan J

C v S [2014] EWHC 3799 (Fam) Father’s application for the summary return of his son to Australia. Application granted.