In summary proceedings under the Hague Convention 1980, it is inappropriate for an English court to undermine the decision of a legitimate court of another contracting state dealing with the custody of a child where the terms of the foreign court’s order were clear, appropriate and had not been appealed. The custody rights which F sought to enforce had been established by the provisional order of the foreign court which had retained charge of the case ever since.
|
A W applied for AR under MCA 1973, seeking equal division of the assets. It was held that, taking into consideration all of the factors under s.25, the assets would be equally divided. H and W’s needs were roughly similar and their contributions to the marriage, though not the same, had been equal. (The division of chattels must be accomplished before trial, in a Scott schedule if the parties cannot agree, setting out reasons why any item is sought.)
|
Where a party to proceedings under s.27 MCA 1973 challenges the jurisdiction of the court on grounds of state immunity, that challenge would be decided in open court.
|
In deciding whether to dismiss a children’s guardian upon the child’s application, judges should focus on the sufficiency of the child’s understanding and reflect the degree to which, today, there is a readier acceptance of the autonomy of the child and their right to participate in the decision making processes that fundamentally affect their family life. Re S (A Minor) (Independent Representation) [1993] Fam.263 is dated and judges had to accept that with articulate teenagers, their right to f ...
|
A judge is entitled not to accept expert evidence, and is entitled to depart from the views of the guardian. But a judge must give good reasons for taking such a course, particularly when the expert and professional evidence is so powerful.
|
Under the CA 1989, families ought to be able to have input into the decision making process and need to be kept abreast of decisions, the reasons for them and their ramifications. Where a LA had kept a M informed of its plans for her children and was right to consider that she was consenting, the failure to include her in a case conference before an ICO application was procedurally fair.
|
The question of residence and contact of a child living in England whose father lives in Scotland are to be determined by an English court.
|
Determination of the mother’s application to discharge a care order should occur before consideration of the local authority’s application for a freeing order. The judge should not have allowed disclosure of confidential information about prospective adopters to the mother where this would lose the placement.
|
The Hague Convention gives paramount importance to the rights and freedoms of the subject child regardless of the potential that an order for a mother to return a child to it’s habitual residence may interfere with Art.8 rights of the mother and half-sibling.
|
Where an unmarried couple begun fertility treatment by donor sperm together, but a child was conceived after their separation, the couple were not receiving treatment "together" at the time of insemination and the man could not be treated as the father under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 s.28(3).
|
| 1 2 3 4 |