Case Summaries

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.

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.