Case Summaries

Throughout their marriage the husband and wife had been members of an Hasidic Jewish community. The wife had subsequently left the community, which had caused a significant rift. Nicholas Cusworth QC considered both the wife’s claim for an order for sale of the former family home under TOLATA, and the husband’s claim for a financial remedy.

Case concerning prospective application for intercountry adoption under the 1993 Hague Convention; the consent given by a testamentary guardian to his own adoption application remained valid.

Application by a father for a declaration of non-paternity and latterly, for a declaration that BT, the putative father, was the father of AS and BS pursuant to section s 55A of the Family Law Act 1986

This an appeal from a case management decision made by DDJ O’Leary in the course of a long-running private law dispute concerning the welfare of a child, Q, aged 6.5. Whilst this concerns the decision to adjourn a remote hearing, the appeal is purely one of procedure and fairness.

This case concerned an appeal brought by a mother against a decision of Her Honour Judge Hillier sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge in October 2019.

Parents’ application for leave to oppose adoption refused. The court considered that previous decisions relating to the family were highly relevant to the decision

Mostyn J refuses a father’s application for leave to apply for contact with his son subject to a Special Guardianship Order due to s91(14) being in place

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by a father against the dismissal of his application for Lara, an 9 year old girl, to live with him, in circumstances where the trial judge had found that Lara had suffered harm in the context of her mother’s adherence to Universal Medicine, found by the judge to be a cult, and that a process of alienating Lara from her father had begun.

In the first case to come before the Court of Appeal on the issue of remote hearings in relation to the welfare of children, the Court, consisting of The President of the Family Division, P. Jackson LJ and Davies LJ, sets out the factors to be borne in mind when determining whether a remote hearing should be undertaken.

This is a judgment of Mostyn J following a contested hearing, conducted by Skype for Business, in care proceedings. Threshold was found to be crossed. The dispute centred on the welfare analysis and final care plan for EK, a baby born in 2019. Care and placement orders were made.

The first contested hearing undertaken by Skype in the COP and Family Courts as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, concerning whether AF should continue to receive Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration (CANH) through a Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy tube (PEG) inserted into his stomach.

After Mostyn J gave judgment on this matter in October 2019, it transpired that he had been misled and that the majority of the money which had been frozen in 2019 was not easily accessible. Mostyn J therefore made a further freezing order and made further costs orders in favour of the wife and the receiver, to cover the costs of their investigations and of the implementation of the costs orders.

Court of Appeal set aside findings of sexual abuse of a child by her father for reasons including that the failures to comply with ABE Guidance were too numerous to be overcome in the context of this case.

Clarification from the Court of Appeal in respect of the duty to consult under s 27 of the Children and Families Act 2014