Case Summaries

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.

A Hague Convention outward return case in which Mostyn J gives a series of strongly worded reminders on how such proceedings should be conducted. He also considers the meaning of the phrase “now settled” in Article 12.

Judgment by Mrs Justice Lieven DBE in which she conducts an analysis of the factors that fall for consideration when making a case management decision regarding the need or otherwise of a separate fact-finding hearing and taking into account the current climate.

An application for a costs order was brought by the LA, the parents, and the Children’s Guardian against DM and MH. DM was originally appointed as the Father’s intermediary and MH acted as his intermediary for 2 days of what was supposed to be the final hearing. The substantive case concerned care proceedings brought by the LA. Mrs Justice Lieven determined that a costs order against DM was justified.

Unsuccessful application by a mother to apply for leave to revoke placement orders in respect of her children

Sir Jonathan Cohen dismissed a claim for maintenance under the Maintenance Regulation (EC) 4/2009 on the basis that Articles 4, 5 and 7 did not save an application barred by Art 3(c).

The current care proceedings related to the youngest 4 children (C, D, E and F). Concerns re-emerged in November 2019 (very shortly after the case had been closed to social services).

The local authority applied for a further secure accommodation order in respect of E, a girl aged 16 at a hearing on 11th October 2021.

On 23 September 2021 Poole J refused an application under the Inherent Jurisdiction of the High Court to authorise the accommodation of a child (LH) in a psychiatric unit, when her condition did not justify the detention there and indeed the placement was not merely inappropriate but harmful: