While a successful asylum application may impact on the implementation of a return order, it does not act as a bar to such an order being made or dispense with the need to determine the application. The timing of an asylum claim may potentially be of considerable importance to the application of the principles set out in G v G
A wife’s application for maintenance pending suit in high net-worth financial proceedings
Application for a Declaration of Parentage under s.55A of the Family Law Act 1986 in respect of a deceased biological father
Peel J considers and applies PD 3AA and 12J (domestic abuse/ coercive control) to a Hague Convention Abduction case and makes a suspended return order to allow M to obtain a visa to travel to Portugal where the welfare issues would be resolved and gave directions to allow a welfare decision if the mother had to return to Pakistan instead.
The Court of Appeal dismisses a father’s appeal within private law children proceedings against an interim order made by Cohen J, which had varied a ‘nesting’ arrangement.
Mrs Justice Knowles exercised her discretion to make parental orders under s54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 in respect of three children despite the applications being made well outside the statutory 6 month time-limit.
The court was concerned with applications for committal arising out of alleged breaches of several orders, including an order in financial remedy proceedings.
Mr Justice Cobb’s fact-finding judgment in respect of cross-allegations of domestic abuse in a case remitted by the Court of Appeal to the High Court for re-hearing following the mother’s successful appeal in the case of B-B, one of the conjoined appeals reported as Re H-N [2021] EWCA Civ 448.
Arbuthnot J allowed an appeal against an order for direct contact made by the circuit judge at the DRA on the basis that the judge had not given sufficient reasons when dealing with the requirements of PD12J. She also considered the courts power to direct who should pay the costs of contact supervision and how the court should allocate responsibility when there had been findings of domestic abuse against the person seeking contact.
Poole J sets out his reasons for sanctioning the appointment of a Special Advocate for the Respondent father to a Forced Marriage Protection Order application, in which the Applicant sought to withhold certain information from the Respondents.
Final/ fact finding hearing in Mother’s application for child arrangements, specific issue and prohibited steps orders after Father abducted the child A to Switzerland.
The application before Poole J was the mother’s application for committal of the defendant father for contempt of court, following breaches of court orders designed to allow the mother to travel to Libya to secure the return of the parties’ children, without the father being present.
Mrs Justice Judd, in granting an appeal against a fact-finding judgment in private law proceedings, stressed the importance of the court complying with Rule 3A and PD 3AA.
