Case Summaries

Hayden J refused father’s application in private law proceedings for a prospective determination that any statement or admission he made in respect of the court’s findings would not be disclosed to the police.

A case in which the court examines the criteria set out in the ACA 2002 in the context of an application for an adoption by an applicant regarding a child who turned 18 the day after the application was made, was in an unconventional relationship with the birth mother and who had, ostensibly, not been living with the subject child in the six month period prior to the application being made.

The Court dismissed an appeal against an order under s91(14) lasting for 2 years coupled with a supervised contact order whereby there was no provision as to how contact would progress; the Appellant unsuccessfully arguing that this was wrong in principle.

Mosty J granted an application for security for costs. The father had applied for an order in England seeking that a child living in Canada should live with him in Dubai. Mostyn J gives a detailed explanation as to the principles to be applied when considering such an application, noting the rarity of these applications in family proceedings given the rarity of costs orders in both children’s cases and at the conclusion of financial remedy applications.

In this very sad case, Poole J made a declaration under the Presumption of Death Act 2013 in respect of a man, P, who, together with his travelling companion, disappeared during a trip to South America in 2011. (Judgment given 12th November 2021)

Lieven J gives reasons for allowing an appeal against the FTT decision to conditionally discharge EG applying s3 Human Rights Act 1998 to extend s72(1)(b)(i) Mental Health Act 1983 to include a requirement to treat in the community. She also dismissed an application to use the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court in respect of vulnerable persons (with capacity), to authorise a deprivation of EG’s liberty, as an unacceptable use of that jurisdiction.

High Court decision in respect of the approach to COVID-19 and winter flu vaccinations for looked after children.

Decision by MacDonald J on the use of inherent jurisdiction to authorise the deprivation of a child’s liberty in an unregistered placement.

Decision of Cobb J in respect of multiple applications by W in financial remedy proceedings with an “enormously lengthy and complex” litigation history dating back some 30 years. The “vast majority” of the applications were found to be “hopeless, unsupported by evidence and without jurisdictional basis”.

Decision of Cohen J in which assets had been significantly depleted as a result of previous litigation concerning the parties’ daughter. The case is a reminder that small money cases can be “infinitely more difficult than cases involving larger sums” and that it is often impossible to find a solution that would make both parties happy.

Decision of Cohen J in which assets had been significantly depleted as a result of previous litigation concerning the parties’ daughter. The case is a reminder that small money cases can be “infinitely more difficult than cases involving larger sums” and that it is often impossible to find a solution that would make both parties happy.

An appeal concerning the powers of the Upper Tribunal hearing an appeal against a decision by the Disclosure and Barring Service, regarding the continued inclusion of the respondent’s name in the children's barred list.

Care proceedings and children with disabilities – finding a way through the challenges

Lieven J determines that the Court of Protection does not have jurisdiction under Mental Capacity Act 2005 to direct the return of XS to this jurisdiction as XS is habitually resident in Lebanon.