In the presumably final chapter of the Re S series of cases (commencing with Re S (Transfer of Residence) [2010] 1 FLR 1785) the court gave reasons for approving a consent order by which the Father withdrew his applications in relation to the implementation of a residence order in his favour. The consent order provided for a residence order in favour of the mother, a supervision order and an order for indirect contact together with a s.91 (14) bar on further applications by either parent. The co ...
|
The CA upheld a judgment refusing to grant Care Orders. It was stated that the Judge was entitled to prefer empirical evidence of what had been happening in the parents' home (which pointed to good enough care) to the evidence of a psychological assessment which concluded that the parenting was likely to fall below a good enough standard. The CA also held that there were legitimate criticisms of the Local Authority's actions in peremptorily removing the children. The language used by the Judge i ...
|
Action for divorce:- The pursuer sought an order for transfer, or assignation, from the defender in relation to any right to payment she may have had from the partners of the pursuer’s firm, and any right to payment under the terms of a decree granted previously by the court. Additionally, the pursuer sought interim interdict of the defender from taking steps to enforce the said decree, and from bringing diligence on the basis of the decree. The temporary judge had refused such a motion fo ...
|
The President sitting in the Court of Protection gave a declaration that a young women lacked capacity to make decisions about where she should live and what contact she should have with her family. A 'best interests' decision will therefore need to be made however the court encouraged negotiation between the parties in the hope an agreement could be reached as to a 'planned, supported and gradual' move back to the home of her parents.
|
In a case concerning whether the English or Swedish court were first seised of divorce proceedings the Court considered the question of whether service of divorce proceedings could be effected on a Sunday . It was held that the FPR 1991 which referred back to earlier rules did indeed serve to prohibit this save in an emergency or with leave of the court. The court considered the consequence of this 'minor unintentional , completely harmless infraction of a now archaic, anomalous, pointless and t ...
|
The court allowed a mother's appeal against the dismissal of her application under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 for a lump sum payment for the benefit of her daughter to mere or contribute to the costs of her Schedule 1 application and proceedings under s.8 of the Children Act. A lump sum of £20,000 was ordered in relation to future costs.
|
The CA in a joint judgment delivered by Lord Neuberger MR clarified the application of the ' so called HIldebrand rules' in ancillary relief cases. It was held that Hildebrand does not provide a legal basis for permitting 'self help disclosure' by illegally obtaining information belonging to the other party in ancillary relief proceedings. The CA further held that the process of disclosure in AR was regulated by the FPR and the court and that under these it is only at the point at which a party ...
|
The CA upheld the judgment of Baker J in ([2010] EWHC 621) holding that the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) under MCA 2005 were compatible with Art 5 ECHR and 'plug the Bournewood gap'. It was further held that Art 5 does not impose any 'threshold' condition which must be met before a best interests assessment under DOLS could be carried out.
|
The CA allowed the appeal of a Husband against the refusal of recognition of a decree of divorce obtained in Moscow in breach of Hemain injunctions. The court held that given that the Wife could avail herself of the provisions for financial relief after a foreign divorce and that the primacy of the English jurisdiction had never been established it would not be contrary to public policy to recognise the decree of divorce.
|
The CA dealt with an application for Judicial Review by two vulnerable young adults who had been at various times provided with housing by the council between their 16th and 17th birthdays under the homelessness legislation. The appellants argued that the accommodation should be treated as having been provided under the Children Act which would make them 'former relevant children' and entitle them to various services. The CA held as a preliminary issue that no useful purpose was served by the pr ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |