RC v FP [2025] EWFC 123
Judgment in private law proceedings extending transparency order, in order to preserve the anonymity of the child until their 18th birthday.
Judgment in private law proceedings extending transparency order, in order to preserve the anonymity of the child until their 18th birthday.
This case was about determining the true parentage and provenance of a baby, Eleanor, brought to the UK under disputed circumstances involving alleged deception and trafficking.
NAI case, injuries found not to be caused by the parents. Criticism of experts’ conduct and the approach of the local authority and observations about translation services.
This case concerns an appeal by the father from findings of fact which were made in the course of proceedings between the father and the mother in which the father seeks an order for the return of their son J, now aged 8, to Egypt.
This case concerns an application for a parental order in respect of B who was born in January 2024 in the United States of America following a gestational surrogacy arrangement executed in Canada.
This case concerns an application by the Father for summary return to Spain of his two children, EF a girl aged 7 and GH a boy aged 5.
FB (Mother) was a Filipino citizen. KS (Father) was a British citizen. The Court was concerned with their child “H” a girl (18 months).
On 10 April 2025, Mr Justice Cusworth, delivered judgment concerning the combined appeals of a mother (M) and her fourteen-and-a-half-year-old son (P) against the order of Her Honour Judge Cole dated 5 November 2024.
Adoption application made by special guardian. Notice given to wrong local authority, but application allowed to proceed.
Judgment considering issue of parental consent for deprivation of liberty, in case where 4 people had parental responsibility for the child.
In this judgment, the President of the Family Division has addressed the problematic issue of expert witness fees in public law family proceedings when those fees exceed the rates sanctioned by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), ‘prior authority’ cases.
Mr. Justice Trowell heard an appeal from HHJ Spinks, in what was termed a Barrell application. This is the authority that makes clear that a judge can reverse/alter his or her decision at any time prior to the order being perfected.
Hadkinson strikes again: The Court of Appeal made a Hadkinson Order preventing the husband pursuing an appeal against a financial remedies order until he has paid a legal services payment order.
The appeal concerned care proceedings for baby girl E.
This case concerns an application brought by the Father pursuant to the 1980 Hague Convention for the summary return to the Republic of Ireland of ‘DC’ who is 7 years old.
This case concerns an application by the Mother in relation to her daughter G aged 14 years old.