Emphasising the court’s need to take a fact based approach to the question of habitual residence it was held that a child, born in the United Kingdom but who had resided with his father in Kurdistan between the ages of 19 months and four years, could not properly be said to have been habitually resident within the jurisdiction at the commencement of wardship proceedings.
|
The CA held that a person who required the permission of the court to make an application for a special guardianship order could neither make an application for such an order nor give notice of his intention to do so unless and until he had obtained the court’s permission to make the application.
|
The CA held that in care proceedings brought after a mother’s partner had been charged with sexual offences involving children, the judge’s decision to adjourn the care proceedings pending the criminal proceedings had been a case management decision and not been plainly wrong in the circumstances.
|
A husband’s appeal against the variation of a nominal periodical payments order on the basis that the district judge had erred in law was dismissed. Contrary to the husband's argument no condition precedent to such a variation could not be found in the statutory provisions or authorities relating to them and therefore the district judge had not erred in law.
|
The CA upheld the decision of a trial judge in dealing with cross applications for residence from a mother and father(who also sought to remove the children to Bulgaria) to grant the father leave to remove children from Bulgaria to live with him there.
|
It was declared that the English court should exercise jurisdiction in relation to a father’s applications for residence and contact. The case was remitted to the county court and the Spanish court invited to decline jurisdiction in relation to those matters.
|
Motion for Residence Order
Here the pursuer concluded for an order ordaining the defender to return his two and a half year old chilcd "M" to Scotland, for a residence order providing that M should reside with him, for an order for delivery of M into his care and control, and for interdict prohibiting the defender from removing M from his care and control or from Scotland. In June 2005 the defender took M to see her family in Pakistan. She was due to return home on 18 August 2005. Having twice changed her travel arrangeme ...
|
An application by a father to amend particulars of claim to plead breaches of the ‘direct’ duty of care owed to him by the first and second defendant local authorities was allowed. It was held to be sufficiently arguable that the relevant authority owed the father a direct duty of care.
|
The European Court of Human Rights awarded an applicant €15,000 in respect of non-pecuniary loss by where a valid custody judgment in their favour was not enforced for approximately two years. As no satisfactory explanation had been put forward to justify those delays it was held there had been a violation of art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
|
The Attorney-General exceptionally agreed to a request by the judge in a pre-hearing review to provide an advocate to the court for the purpose of cross-examining the vulnerable 20 year old daughter in relation to allegations of sexual abuse by a father acting in person in contact and PR applications in respect of her younger siblings.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |