Judgments

Application to stay the determination of divorce and financial remedy proceedings on the grounds that it was more convenient for the issues to be litigated in Florida.

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against the findings of fact made in care proceedings. The judge did not provide a sufficient analysis of all the evidence nor a satisfactory explanation for the conclusion reached that one or both of the parents inflicted injuries on two children.

The proceedings concerned four children, three girls aged 9, 7 and 5, and a boy aged 2½, who were living with the mother in a residential assessment unit. The father had disengaged from the proceedings. The mother had a diagnosis of Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder and was alleged to have made unsafe decisions for the children, including repeated unsubstantiated allegations of third-party abuse.

The court was asked to recognise, at common law, a Nigerian adoption order made in favour of W and H in respect of X, a seven-year-old child.

At a finding of fact hearing on the appellant mother’s allegations of abuse against the father, the Recorder not only dismissed her allegations but also found her to have fabricated them and to be guilty of ‘parental alienation’ in respect of both the parents’ twin children.

Appeal by a mother against a finding in care proceedings that she had inflicted a fracture to her 15-week-old son’s arm. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the judge had been entitled to prefer the father’s evidence notwithstanding the evidence of his propensity to anger and aggression, and that a judge who identifies a perpetrator on the balance of probabilities need not go on to consider a pool of perpetrators.

The Court of Appeal dismissed a local authority’s appeal against the refusal of a placement order for a four-year-old girl whose realistic permanence options were adoption or long-term foster care. Although the judgment contained no side-by-side balance sheet, read as a whole, it adequately evaluated the competing options, and the judge was entitled to prioritise S’s settled placement and her need for frequent direct contact with her mother.

The Court of Appeal has set aside a £6m financial remedy award and ordered the entire case to be reheard, allowing appeals brought by the Husband, the Wife and a Bahraini bank joined to the proceedings.

Adoption order made in favour of the applicant uncle in respect of his 18-year-old niece, despite opposition by both birth parents.

The Court of Appeal allowed a father’s second appeal against an order that the child move from his care to live with her mother. The first-instance decision was unjust as a result of procedural irregularity, having relied substantially on a Cafcass assessment based on the conclusion that domestic abuse had occurred, failed to consider the consequences of changing D’s home and school, and contained inadequate reasons. The appeal was allowed, and the matter remitted for rehearing.

This was an appeal on a procedural point, against the care and placement orders made with respect to a boy aged 4 (T), and a girl aged 2 (F). The court dismissed the appeal on the basis that the failure to serve the child’s permanence reports in adoption proceedings to the parents did not render the decision to make placement orders unjust.

Application by a Swedish mother to relocate her nine-year-old daughter from England to Sweden following the refusal of an earlier Hague Convention return application.

Financial remedies case concerning the costs arising from the wife’s successful appeal against a finding that the husband’s parents were the beneficial owners of a property.

The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against care and placement orders, holding that the welfare and proportionality evaluation undertaken at first instance did not sufficiently analyse the likely consequences of future harm or the availability of realistic protective measures before concluding that adoption was necessary.

In a very short judgment, District Judge Vine discharged an appointed Qualified Legal Representative due to significant concerns as to the approach taken to challenging the evidence and provided a concise and useful overview of the framework guiding the duty of QLRs and how these may impact upon fair trial rights.

Knowles J made a parental order in favour of a single intended father following an international surrogacy arrangement involving Northern Cyprus, Kyrgyzstan, and other contemplated countries of birth. The judgment warns of the legal, immigration, and welfare risks of entering into cross-border surrogacy arrangements without prior independent legal advice.