Case Summaries

This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal, heard by Lord Justice Peter Jackson and Lord Justice Baker. The order that was appealed was one of Mr Justice Francis sitting as a High Court Judge.

This was an application by the Peterborough City Council (“LA”) for a deprivation of liberty order (“DOLS order”) in respect of SM who is 12 years old with profound and enduring disabilities. Mrs Justice Lieven’s judgment set out that this case raises an important issue about the requirement for such an order in the case of a very severely disabled child such as SM.

Guidance as to use of Intermediaries

Unsuccessful Appeal of decision to vacate a Fact-Finding Hearing

This case concerned two children; ‘C’, aged 8, and ‘D’, aged 6.  The children’s maternal uncle, AB, sought a Special Guardianship Order in respect of the children to enable him to collect the children from school, when neither parent is available to do so, and look after them.

At the end of February 2024, Hayden J gave judgment after a fact-finding hearing in long-running Court of Protection proceedings that were issued in December 2021: An ICB v G [2024] EWCOP 13.

This was a decision following a hearing before Mr Justice Cobb in the High Court. The application before the court was brought under Article 21 of the Hague Convention 1980.

In this judgment the President of the Family Division grappled with the increasingly common scenario where the statutory prohibition on cross examination applied, but where no Qualified Legal Representative (QLR) was in fact available to be appointed by the court to conduct the questioning on behalf of the prohibited person.

This case concerned an application for a summary return order to Italy pursuant to the 1980 Hague Convention. The matter was heard by Mr Justice Cusworth and the proceedings concerned two children, XR aged 6 and XZ aged 3.

The case of Tousi v Gaydukova [2024] EWCA Civ 203 started its life as a straightforward application for a transfer of tenancy. However, what unfolded was far from straightforward.

This was a successful appeal heard in the Court of Appeal in relation to a summary return order (relating to United Arab Emirates) that was made in the High Court.

This was a reported decision from Mr Glasson KC sitting as a High Court Judge. The application relating to one by the mother who sought a return order of the child, ‘T’ from the jurisdiction of Pakistan.

Appeal by M against finding that injuries to child were caused by one of 6 relatives who were present, rather than accident.

Mr Justice Poole has refused the local authority’s applications for DNA testing and declaration of parentage, in the context of public law proceedings, notwithstanding that the adults involved created what he called ‘a welfare minefield’ in conceiving D, and had the potential to cause emotional harm.

These proceedings were heard by Mr Justice MacDonald in the High Court. The case was one which had been remitted by the Court of Appeal for re-hearing on the question of habitual residence (see Re A (A Child) (Habitual Residence: 1996 Hague Child Protection Convention) [2023] EWCA Civ 659). 

A mother lost her appeal against the decision to refuse her habeas corpus application in relation to her child, whom she knew was living with the child’s father.