‘The President of the Family Division has adjourned contact proceedings by an unrepresented father pending the Ministry of Justice or any other responsible body to come up with the solution to the problem of one parent suffering an injustice due to the withdrawal of legal aid.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 10th June 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The most senior family judge in England and Wales has asked the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, to explain how a case involving a father’s contact with his son can proceed without legal aid.’
The Guardian, 9th June 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Louise McCallum, barrister at Zenith Chambers, Leeds, looks at the new Child Arrangements Programme that came into force on 22 April 2014.’
Family Law Week, 23rd April 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘An “insensitive” father banned by the courts from seeing his children has been warned by a judge not to type his emails to them in capitals – because it looks like he is shouting.’
Daily Telegraph, 14th April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Social services ask High Court to give two young children new names and even cut links with other siblings to protect them from abusive parents.’
Daily Telegraph, 3rd April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
In re C (A Child): [2013] EWCA Civ 1412; [2013] WLR (D) 449
‘The Court of Appeal gave guidance as to the proper approach to be adopted in family proceedings when considering a without notice application for a prohibited steps order and the making of a contact order.’
WLR Daily, 21st November 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“Andrew Pack, care lawyer with Brighton and Hove City Council, considers the options for local authorities in the wake of the Court of Appeal’s landmark judgment in W (A Child) v Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council [2013] EWCA Civ 1227.”
Family Law Week, 17th November 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“The Court of Appeal has taken the unusual step of reversing a denial of contact order, by reviewing the question of the proportionality of the order in relation to the children’s right to family life under Article 8.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 26th September 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“For those of you who had been pondering about the applicability of Re B [2013] UKSC 33 to private law cases – Re A (A Child) [2013] EWCA Civ 1104 goes some distance towards providing an answer. It concerns exceptionally long running private law proceedings, of the ‘implacable hostility’ variety, which the Circuit Judge acknowledged on concluding them had been characterised by systemic failure. The order was for no direct contact between the girl and her father and a s91(14) order until the child’s 16th birthday (she was 13 at the time). The father appealed and did so in person. He criticised the manner in which the entire proceedings had been conducted. He did not accept that the Circuit Judge was right to draw a line under the proceedings, now that the child was 13 years old and firmly expressing her opposition to contact and the proceedings.”
Pink Tape, 22nd September 2013
Source: www.pinktape.co.uk
“A vegetarian mother who stopped her five year-old son from seeing his father because she feared he might feed him meat must let him see the child or lose custody, a judge ruled.”
Daily Telegraph, 11th September 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“On 31st July the Court of Appeal delivered a reserved judgement in the case of PM –v- MB & anr [2013] EWCA Civ 969, in which the Father of the child concerned sought to appeal a County Court decision refusing him parental responsibility, allowing indirect email contact only, and, section 91(14) CA ’89, prohibiting any further application by him without leave for a period of two years.”
Sovereign Chambers, 5th August 2013
Source: www.sovereignchambers.co.uk
“Alex Verdan QC of 4 Paper Buildings considers three important recent judgments in Children private law proceedings.”
Family Law Week, 19th June 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“A father who was jailed after abducting his daughter and taking her to Pakistan
for three years has appeared in court to make a bid for access to the child.”
BBC News, 15th March 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Where do parents and prospective parents stand after the very recent decision in the case of S v D and E? What can parenting lesbian mothers and the men who donate sperm to enable them to have children expect if there is a disagreement between them as to the role of biological fathers in their children’s lives?”
Zenith Chambers, 14th February 2013
Source: www.zenithchambers.co.uk
“Sperm donors who know the parents to whom they have donated can apply for contact with their biological children, a court has ruled. Previously this was not allowed. The ruling has major implications for anyone who has a child conceived using the sperm of someone they know and for those considering starting a family this way.”
The Guardian, 31st January 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“The identity of a third party and the allegations of sexual abuse which she made in confidence against the father of a child who was the subject of contact proceedings would be disclosed in those proceedings since to do so would not violate her right to protection from inhuman or degrading treatment under article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and would be a proportionate interference with her right to respect for her private life under article 8, since it was justified by the need to protect the parents’ and child’s rights to a fair trial and respect for their family life, guaranteed by articles 6 and 8 of the Convention.”
WLR Daily, 12th December 2012
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“There have been a number of important privacy judgments in recent weeks, particularly concerning Article 8 ECHR in cases with child protection elements.”
Panopticon, 13th December 2012
“Government plans to amend the 1989 Children Act by introducing a presumption of shared parenting are well-intentioned but misguided, say the authors of new research into childhood experience of family break-ups.”
Family Law Week, 22nd November 2012
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
“A father-of-four has criticised an ‘absurd’ court order that bans him from returning his children’s text messages or phone calls.”
The Independent, 17th July 2012
Source: www.independent.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025