Ranjit Singh

Ranjit represents children and their parents in private law matters and is frequently instructed on a public access basis. His private law work includes cases of all levels of complexity, including those involving parental alienation and intractable contact disputes. Ranjit frequently represents parents where there are applications for changes of living arrangements, applications for “no contact” orders or cases with an international dimension.

Ranjit represents children, parents and local authorities within care proceedings and is also often instructed on behalf of interveners, grandparents and special guardians. His recent work increasingly involves allegations of non-accidental injury and multi-week finding of fact hearings. Recent cases included representing a father at a 3-week final hearing where the local authority was seeking adoption in respect of the subject child. This case involved lengthy cross-examination of expert witnesses and ultimately led to the return of the child to the care of Ranjit’s client.

Ranjit represents children, parents and local authorities within care proceedings and is also often instructed on behalf of interveners, grandparents and special guardians or proposed adopters. His public law work increasingly involves allegations of non-accidental injury and multi-week finding of fact hearings. Ranjit is also familiar with successfully representing his clients at appeal stage, including in the Court of Appeal.

10th March 2022

Re D (Leave to apply to revoke a placement order)

Ranjit successfully represented a mother who had been refused permission to apply to revoke a placement order made in respect of her children. The court of Appeal accepted his argument that the previous judge had placed the bar to high.

PDF

11th December 2020

Re X, T A E and S (Children)

Ranjit represented a father in the Court of Appeal where it was established that the previous judge had made a finding that exceeded the evidence available on that particular issue.

PDF

31st July 2020

Re N (Children) (Interim Care)

Ranjit successfully represented grandparents in the Court of Appeal, with whom the children were placed. The Court of Appeal accepted the argument that the previous judge had failed to apply the correct principles when determining whether the children should be removed.

PDF

3rd August 2018 | Bailii

Herts CC v TJ [2018] EWHC 2796 (Fam)

PDF

31st May 2012 | Bailii

A Local Authority v DS [2012] EWHC 1442 (Fam)

President’s judgment concerning delay and ultimate refusal by the LSC to grant prior authority for the instruction of an independent social worker to perform a parenting and risk assessment of parents. The President provides Guidance on seeking prior authority from the LSC for instructing an expert witness in family proceedings.

PDF

Ranjit represents parties involved in proceedings in the Court of Protection in both health and welfare and financial proceedings. He recently represented the mother of P in a case where P was removed following allegations of poor care and serious assault. P was ultimately returned to live with and be cared for by the mother. Other cases have involved a crossover into the jurisdiction of the Mental Health Act.

Ranjit is instructed to represent parties in financial remedy applications, including interveners to those proceedings. His recent cases have included examples at every level of asset base and complex questions of jurisdiction.

Re D (Leave to apply to revoke a placement order) Ranjit successfully represented a mother who had been refused permission to apply to revoke a placement order made in respect of her children. The court of Appeal accepted his argument that the previous judge had placed the bar to high.

Re X, T A E and S (Children) Ranjit represented a father in the Court of Appeal where it was established that the previous judge had made a finding that exceeded the evidence available on that particular issue.

Re N (Children) (Interim Care) Ranjit successfully represented grandparents in the Court of Appeal, with whom the children were placed. The Court of Appeal accepted the argument that the previous judge had failed to apply the correct principles when determining whether the children should be removed.

Herts CC v TJ [2018] EWHC 2796 (Fam)

A Local Authority v DS [2012] EWHC 1442 (Fam) President’s judgment concerning delay and ultimate refusal by the LSC to grant prior authority for the instruction of an independent social worker to perform a parenting and risk assessment of parents. The President provides Guidance on seeking prior authority from the LSC for instructing an expert witness in family proceedings.