HHJ Afzal CBE gives reasons for discharging a placement order and approving a plan of long-term fostering for C. He also criticised the local authority and IRO for their failures to take action sooner. The judgement was published to promote the aims of transparency.
A judgment from the President of the Family Division, provides guidance on the court’s power to terminate the appointment of a court-appointed Qualifying Legal Representative (QLR), particularly where the QLR is also instructed in parallel criminal proceedings concerning domestic abuse.
A District Judge dismisses an application by the mother of a child in care to prevent the local authority from registering the child’s birth.
This judgment is from a two-day final hearing before DJ Barrie at the Central Family Court.Â
This judgment was published in respect of proceedings concerning one child, aged 10 who was living with her grandparents pursuant to a SGO Order in 2018 (paragraph 1). The mother applied with the leave of the court to discharge the order, or in the alternative, for an increase in contact (paragraph 1).
This case concerned an application to set aside a return order, dated 6 December 2024. Despite the high bar on applications to set aside, the court granted the mother’s application and brought an end to the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention proceedings.
This case concerned the following applications: (a) the wife’s application for permission to bring a claim for financial remedies; and (b) the husband’s applications inviting the court to refuse recognition of the Khula and for a Part 25 application to appoint an expert to advise on the likelihood of the Khula being set aside in Pakistan.
A Circuit Judge dismisses Local Authority’s application to withhold psychological Report from a father.
 The High Court refuses to duplicate youth justice licensing regime through deprivation of liberty orders
This judgment requires full reading to consider the background and facts. This judgment summary will outline some of the useful points of the law that the Recorder outlined which was directly relevant to the case.
This is a judgment in the application for a lump sum for litigation costs funding brought by the Applicant mother under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989, pertaining to proceedings under section 8 of the Children Act 1989.
Sir Andrew McFarlane P, Lady Justice King and Lord Justice Singh. The Court of Appeal upheld the judge’s refusal to grant a s 26 order, finding that while sibling contact was desirable, it was not essential, and the potential deterrent effect on prospective adopters was a relevant factor.
ER v NT [2025] EWHC 2146 (Fam) represents a significant High Court decision concerning the necessity of fact-finding hearings in private law children proceedings involving allegations of domestic abuse and coercive control.
This was a judgment of Mrs Justice Theis DBE, concerning an application by a hospital trust to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from a 10-month-old child, ‘Z’.
This case concerned an application by the Trust for a declaration as to whether it was in the best interests of baby boy (’J’) to receive continued ventilation. The issue for the Court was when to consider the matter, in circumstances where the child’s mother was lacking capacity to participate in the proceedings.
In this high-net-worth financial remedies case, the court was asked to determine the appropriate lump sum payable to the husband following the breakdown of a 9-year marriage.
