The CA allowed an appeal in relation to a TOLATA 1996 claim on the basis that, inter alia, the significance of the parties having been engaged was not taken into account. The order for sale was stayed and the matter remitted for re-hearing before a different judge.
|
The court upheld the first instance decision that payment to a wife of 75% of the net proceeds of sale from the former matrimonial home was void under s.284 Insolvency Act 1986. The decision was upheld on different grounds the court holding that although the parties were capable of entering a binding agreement on the facts of the case they had not done so.
|
Following a hearing in February 2010 at which a local authority was ordered to pay £100,000 towards the publicly funded costs of the parents the BBC applied for an order setting aside the prohibition on identifying the local authority concerned. As evident from the case name, they were successful. The court holding that the risk of harm to the children from allowing the local authority to be named was low.
|
The petitioner, Aberdeen City Council, sought an order to free the child, C, born 26 March 2007, for adoption under the Adoption (Scotland) Act 1978. The first respondent, JM, was the mother of C, and had parental rights and responsibilities. The second respondent, AL, was the father of C, and also retained parental rights of responsibilities over said child. JM and AL were additionally the parents of two other children, born in 2005, and 2006; both of these children had subsequently been free ...
|
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.
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |