Everything You Need To Know About Secrecy In The Family Courts – RightsInfo

‘One of the central principles of the family justice system has long been ensuring the privacy and confidentiality of the families involved. Families going through divorces, child custody proceedings or cases involving child abuse have typically had their identities and the details of their cases protected. But over recent years there has been a rising perception that the family courts are secretive and unaccountable – sparking calls for increased transparency, and raising important questions for human rights.’

Full story

Rightsinfo, 27th July 2016

Source: www.rightsinfo.org

Comments Off on Everything You Need To Know About Secrecy In The Family Courts – RightsInfo

Seen and heard? Children as witnesses in family proceedings – Family Law Week

‘Damian Stuart, Barrister, FOURTEEN, re-visits Baroness Hale’s seminal speech in Re W (Children) (Abuse: Oral Evidence) in the light of Lord Justice McFarlane’s recent judgment in Re E (A Child).’

Full story

Family Law Week, 22nd July 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Seen and heard? Children as witnesses in family proceedings – Family Law Week

iPhone evidence ‘could be more effective than court hearing’ – Law Society’s Gazette

‘Resolving neighbour disputes using iPhone evidence and a video hearing might be more effective than the parties travelling several miles to court, a senior government official has said, outlining significant developments to modernise the justice system.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 21st July 2016

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Comments Off on iPhone evidence ‘could be more effective than court hearing’ – Law Society’s Gazette

Finance & Divorce Update, July 2016 – Family Law week

‘Edward Heaton, Principal Associate and Jane Booth, Associate, both of Mills & Reeve LLP, analyse the news and case law relating to financial remedies and divorce during June 2016.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 15th July 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Finance & Divorce Update, July 2016 – Family Law week

In re X (A Child) (Reporting Restrictions: Guidance) – WLR Daily

In re X (A Child) (Reporting Restrictions: Guidance) [2016] EWHC 1668 (Fam)

‘Those applying for reporting restriction orders in family proceedings need to comply meticulously with the obligation to adequately notify the media in accordance with the FPR Practice Direction 12I—Applications for Reporting Restriction Orders and associate Cafcass practice note (paras 10, 25–28).’

WLR Daily, 4th July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re X (A Child) (Reporting Restrictions: Guidance) – WLR Daily

Ordering the would-be undertaker: the equitable reach of the Family Court – Family Law Week

‘Norma Cronin, solicitor at Hughes Fowler Carruthers and Mark Ablett, Senior Paralegal at Hughes Fowler Carruthers and soon to be pupil barrister at 1 Garden Court Family Law Chambers consider the troublesome issue of enforcement of undertakings in financial remedies cases.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 8th July 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Ordering the would-be undertaker: the equitable reach of the Family Court – Family Law Week

A Local Authority v D and others [2016] EWHC 1438 (Fam) – WLR Daily

A Local Authority v D and others [2016] EWHC 1438 (Fam)

‘The applicant local authority applied, pursuant to paragraph 6(3) of Schedule 3 to the Children Act 1989, for a six-month extension of a supervision order made in its favour under section 31 of the 1989 Act in respect of three children from the travelling community. The application was dated the day that the original order expired but was not issued until the following day.’

WLR Daily, 1st July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on A Local Authority v D and others [2016] EWHC 1438 (Fam) – WLR Daily

And There Lurks the Minotaur: The Interrelationship Between the Inherent Jurisdiction and Section 25, CA 1989: Part I – Family Law Week

Posted June 24th, 2016 in children, family courts, jurisdiction, news by tracey

‘Alex Laing, barrister of Coram Chambers, considers the interrelationship of the inherent jurisdiction and secure accommodation.’

Full story

Family Law week, 22nd June 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on And There Lurks the Minotaur: The Interrelationship Between the Inherent Jurisdiction and Section 25, CA 1989: Part I – Family Law Week

Family President orders re-hearing of fact finding in case where boy adopted – Local Government Lawyer

Posted June 23rd, 2016 in adoption, children, evidence, family courts, news by sally

‘The President of the Family Division has ordered the re-opening of a finding of fact hearing in care proceedings where a boy was later adopted.’

Full story

Local Government Lawyer, 22nd June 2016

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Comments Off on Family President orders re-hearing of fact finding in case where boy adopted – Local Government Lawyer

Ellie Butler judge ‘took unwarranted steps’ to reunite her with violent parents – The Guardian

‘A senior judge in the family court took “unwarranted” extra steps in reuniting a man with a violent and criminal past with his young daughter 11 months before he beat her to death, the author of a serious case review has said.’

Full story

The Guardian, 22nd June 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on Ellie Butler judge ‘took unwarranted steps’ to reunite her with violent parents – The Guardian

Activities of McKenzie Friends in family courts to go under the microscope – The Bar Council

Posted June 16th, 2016 in family courts, McKenzie friends, press releases by tracey

‘The activities of unregulated, untrained and uninsured McKenzie Friends in the family courts is to come under the microscope with the commissioning of field research by the Bar Council into how they handle court work.’

Full press release

The Bar Council, 10th June 2016

Source: www.barcouncil.org.uk

Comments Off on Activities of McKenzie Friends in family courts to go under the microscope – The Bar Council

In re A (A Child) (Baby Relinquished for Adoption: Case Management)

In re A (A Child) (Baby Relinquished for Adoption: Case Management) [2016] EWFC 25

‘A, a baby born in England to Latvian parents, was relinquished at birth for adoption and quickly placed with foster parents who were approved to adopt. On the understanding that there was no one within the extended natural family, either in England or in Latvia, in a position to care for A, and with the consent of the birth parents given in accordance with sections 19 and 20 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002, the local authority proceeded to convert A’s short-term arrangements to an adoptive placement and notified the Latvian central authority of A’s situation. The foster parents, with whom A had lived for much of his life, applied to adopt him. The Latvian central authority, having made its own enquiries of relatives in Latvia, identified the maternal grandmother as a potential long-term carer for A, had completed a favourable preliminary suitability assessment and commissioned a full suitability assessment. The central authority opposed the adoption of A in England and submitted its concerns that the approach of the English courts towards adoption cases placed insufficient weight on the rights of a child to grow up in his inherited culture and was therefore potentially contrary to articles 36 and 37 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 1963 and a breach of articles 8 and 20 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989. The birth mother, who had deliberately not informed her wider family in Latvia of the proposed adoption, continued to support adoption by the foster parents, maintaining her opinion that an education and upbringing in England would be in A’s best interests and that her mother would find it difficult physically and financially to care for A. At a case management hearing, the children’s guardian appointed for A recommended an adjournment to enable completion of the grandmother’s assessment. In circumstances where the prospective adopters, the birth parents and the local authority all supported the adoption, where factors from the welfare checklist in section 1(4) of the 2002 Act pointed towards adoption, and where a delay in making a decision was likely to prejudice A’s welfare, the issue before the judge was whether he should make an adoption order without having considered the substantial assessment of the suitability of the maternal grandmother in Latvia as A’s long-term carer.’

WLR Daily, 6th May 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re A (A Child) (Baby Relinquished for Adoption: Case Management)

Family law at a distance – Speech by Lord Sumption

Family law at a distance (PDF)

Speech by Lord Sumption

At a Glance Conference 2016, Royal College of Surgeons, 8th June 2016

Source: www.supremecourt.uk

Comments Off on Family law at a distance – Speech by Lord Sumption

Sumption: Legal specialisations are “essentially bogus” – Legal Futures

‘Legal specialisations are “essentially bogus”, Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption declared today as he urged practitioners to break out of their core areas and learn from other parts of the profession.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 8th June 2016

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Comments Off on Sumption: Legal specialisations are “essentially bogus” – Legal Futures

Preventing Child Sexual Exploitation: a lacuna in the law – Family Law Week

‘Matthew Warmoth, pupil barrister at Fourteen, finds that the court can do little to protect children from CSE when the exploiter is not a party to proceedings and there has been no police caution or conviction for a sexual or violent offence.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 4th May 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Preventing Child Sexual Exploitation: a lacuna in the law – Family Law Week

Mother who tried to move family to Syria ordered to give up children – The Guardian

Posted May 4th, 2016 in care orders, children, families, family courts, Islam, news, terrorism by tracey

‘The high court has ruled that the three children of a Leicester woman who tried to take them to Isis-controlled territory must live with their grandmother.’

Full story

The Guardian, 3rd May 2016

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off on Mother who tried to move family to Syria ordered to give up children – The Guardian

Part 25 Applications – The theory and the practice – Family Law Week

‘Marie Crawford, barrister, Becket Chambers considers the disconnection between theory and practice in making applications to adduce expert evidence.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 21st April 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on Part 25 Applications – The theory and the practice – Family Law Week

The Brave New World of Electronic Filing at the Central Family Court – Family Law Week

‘Michael Allum, Solicitor with The International Family Law Group LLP, explains how the Central Family Court’s pilot scheme for electronic filing of documents will work.’

Full story

Family Law Week, 22nd April 2016

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Comments Off on The Brave New World of Electronic Filing at the Central Family Court – Family Law Week

Judge allows paternity test for DNA disease analysis – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted April 22nd, 2016 in cancer, DNA, family courts, genetic testing, human tissue, news, paternity by tracey

‘Spencer v Anderson (Paternity Testing) [2016] EWHC 851 (Fam). A fascinating case in the Family Division throws up a number of facts that some may find surprising. One is that this is the first time the courts in this country have been asked to direct post-mortem scientific testing to establish paternity. The other is that DNA is not covered by the Human Tissue Act, because genetic material does not contain human cells. One might wonder why the statute doesn’t, given that DNA is the instruction manual that makes the human tissue that it covers – but maybe updating the 2004 law to cover genetic material would create more difficulties than it was designed to resolve.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 20th April 2016

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off on Judge allows paternity test for DNA disease analysis – UK Human Rights Blog

In re G (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008) – WLR Daily

In re G (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008) [2016] EWHC 729 (Fam)

‘The applicant, X, who was at all material times in a same-sex relationship with Y, was the biological mother of twins, born as a result of IVF treatment provided by a licensed fertility clinic to Y, the gestational mother and the twins’ legal parent. Y was at all material times in a civil partnership with, though separated from, another woman who was not a party to the proceedings. Y, as the gestational mother, should have signed Form WP, and X, as her partner, should have signed Form PP. In fact, and as a result of what was accepted to have been errors by the clinic, Y completed and signed a Form PP and X completed and signed a Form WP. A similar mistake was made in relation to the Form IC signed by both Y and X. X, supported by Y, sought a declaration pursuant to section 55A of the Family Law Act 1986 that she was, in accordance with section 43 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008, the legal parent of the twins and in the circumstances it was common ground that X was entitled to the relief she sought. The issues were: (1) whether that was a conclusion that the court could come to simply by a process of construction or whether the proper form of order was a decree of rectification and (2) arising out of the fact that Y was at all material times in a civil partnership with another woman, the potential impact of section 42(1) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 which provided: “If at the time of the placing in her of the embryo or the sperm and eggs or of her artificial insemination, W was a party to a civil partnership or a marriage with another woman, then subject to section 45(2) to (4), the other party to the civil partnership or marriage is to be treated as a parent of the child unless it is shown that she did not consent to the placing in W of the embryo or the sperm and eggs or to her artificial insemination … ”’

WLR Daily, 6th April 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off on In re G (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008) – WLR Daily