Judgments

This case was before Recorder O’Grady who re-stated the key principles concerning whether to conclude a public law case at an Issues Resolution Hearing (IRH).

This case involved public law proceedings concerning a 17-month-old baby boy (F). The Local Authority were successful in their application for Care and Placement Orders, which were supported by the Father and the Guardian, but were ordered to pay the maternal grandmother’s costs due to their failure to contact and assess the child’s wider family.

This judgment addressed the issues of (a) whether the husband had transferred the shares and the land, thereby divesting himself of the assets, with the intent of defeating the wife’s matrimonial claim; and (b) what could be deemed marital assets and so, the award the court should make to the respondent wife.

Judgment following a Final Hearing on 5 September 2025 concerning the validity of a foreign marriage heard by Deputy District Judge Williams at Leicester Family Court.

MacDonald J dismissed a father’s appeal against a child arrangements order that departed from CAFCASS recommendations, reinforcing the broad judicial discretion to depart from expert welfare advice and the high threshold for appellate intervention in children proceedings.

This case is a powerful illustration of the court’s inherent authority to uphold the dignity of its proceedings, even in the face of hostility and disruption.

This was a judgment of HHJ Earley regarding an application by a child to discharge a Care Order that the Court had made ten months earlier. The Court dismissed the application and maintained the order, but in doing so made pointed comments regarding the local authority’s failures to implement the agreed care plan.

A decision of Mr Justice Peel addressing the question of whether the Husband (“H”) was entitled to refer to events which took place at a private FDR beyond those already provided for within the Family Procedure Rules (“FPR”). It was determined he was not.

HHJ Afzal CBE gives reasons for discharging a placement order and approving a plan of long-term fostering for C. He also criticised the local authority and IRO for their failures to take action sooner. The judgement was published to promote the aims of transparency.

A judgment from the President of the Family Division, provides guidance on the court’s power to terminate the appointment of a court-appointed Qualifying Legal Representative (QLR), particularly where the QLR is also instructed in parallel criminal proceedings concerning domestic abuse.

A District Judge dismisses an application by the mother of a child in care to prevent the local authority from registering the child’s birth.

This judgment is from a two-day final hearing before DJ Barrie at the Central Family Court. 

This judgment was published in respect of proceedings concerning one child, aged 10 who was living with her grandparents pursuant to a SGO Order in 2018 (paragraph 1).  The mother applied with the leave of the court to discharge the order, or in the alternative, for an increase in contact (paragraph 1).

This case concerned an application to set aside a return order, dated 6 December 2024. Despite the high bar on applications to set aside, the court granted the mother’s application and brought an end to the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention proceedings.

This case concerned the following applications: (a) the wife’s application for permission to bring a claim for financial remedies; and (b) the husband’s applications inviting the court to refuse recognition of the Khula and for a Part 25 application to appoint an expert to advise on the likelihood of the Khula being set aside in Pakistan.

A Circuit Judge dismisses Local Authority’s application to withhold psychological Report from a father.