Davies v Welch [2010] EWHC 3034 Admin
Application under CPR Part 8 for committal of the wife’s solicitor, who had disclosed financial documents from ancillary relief proceedings to the Child Support Agency. Application refused.
Category tags are only available from 2024 use the advanced search for older updates.
Application under CPR Part 8 for committal of the wife’s solicitor, who had disclosed financial documents from ancillary relief proceedings to the Child Support Agency. Application refused.
Care Proceedings: Fact finding hearing to determine the truth and extent of mother’s allegations of serious sexual abuse against the children’s father and other named men. Baker J found the allegations of sexual abuse to be untrue and identified a number of matters about care proceedings and the wider system of child protection from which important lessons can be drawn.
Private law children application for permission to appeal s.91(14) order. Permission granted limited to the duration of the order.
Child Abduction: Appeal of order for return of a 4 year old child to Estonia. Appeal dismissed with amendment by way of slip rule to duration of the order. Matter to return to a Family Division judge for implementation.
Application by a mother for permission to appeal an order which transferred the residence of her child to the child’s paternal grandmother. Permission refused.
Court of Appeal determined whether an ancillary relief judgment should be published when one of the parties had conspired to present a perjured case and, if it should (as in this case), the extent of any anonymisation or redaction.
Local Authority appeal against care orders and dismissal of applications for placement orders in relation to two children aged 5 and 3. Court of Appeal set aside care orders and the dismissal of placement orders, replacing them with orders adjourning proceedings with an interim 28 day care order.
Application under the Hague Convention 1980 for the summary return of two children abducted from Germany. Issues as to the representation, and party status of, children. Exercise of discretion in cases where siblings express distinctive wishes and feelings.
Solicitor’s application for permission to appeal in a Court of Protection case against a costs order made against her in respect of an unsuccessful application to be appointed Health & Welfare Deputy. Permission to appeal not granted.
Mother’s appeal to the Court of Appeal to reverse order made that the parties’ two children should be returned to Canada after their unlawful abduction to this jurisdiction. Appeal allowed.
Declaration sought by an 80 year old woman (MB) with severe Alzheimer’s that she was unlawfully deprived of her liberty after expiration of a standard authorisation given under Schedule A1 to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and prior to the making of an order under s.16 MCA authorising her deprivation of liberty at a residential home. Declaration granted.
Care proceedings. Issue as to the validity of hair testing in order to establish whether a parent has consumed alcohol and, if so, to what extent. The Court emphasised the need for the exercise of considerable caution when hair tests for alcohol are being interpreted and relied upon.
Court of Appeal allowed father’s appeal against compensation and committal orders. The judge had overstated the father’s obligations under the order for contact and the judge had not considered the possibility of impossibility of performance.
Ancillary relief order by consent was vitiated by non-disclosure of assets by the husband. Husband ordered to pay additional lump sum. Appeal by the husband that the award should be set aside dismissed.
Application by father to enforce in the High Court a contact order made by consent in England, with mother, who had relocated to Canada, contesting jurisdiction. Held, the court had jurisdiction pursuant to Brussels II Revised.
Big money ancillary relief appeal where husband had inherited substantial wealth and the parties had lived an extravagant lifestyle. Held: the wife’s lump sum was reduced to take into account her actual housing need, and her appropriate income needs, but the judge had been correct to capitalize rather than secure the periodical payments order.