Family proceedings Fact finding hearing. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed, in part, an appeal against orders allowing for publicity and media attendance at the re-opening of a fact finding hearing in care proceedings. In circumstances where the re-hearing was in respect of fresh medical evidence, the court ordered that any reference to medical evidence be redacted from the earlier fact finding judgment. Further, tighter requirements were put in place regarding the control of reporting by the media.
Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court, in a fact finding hearing where two families were involved made findings of fact in relation to a non-accidental injury of a child L, in order to determine the future of three infants who were each the subject of care proceedings brought by the local authority. The principal facts which the court was being asked to find concerned the brain injuries sustained by L.
Mental health Court of protection. The Court of Protection approved a care plan proposed by the applicant local health board for the respondent, W, who suffered from anorexia. The plan would allow W to return to her home and her flat from inpatient treatment to attempt to remedy her condition. If the attempt failed, the normal ethical and legal obligation upon the health services to reassess the situation would exist.
Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division considered the applicant local authority's application for an interim care order regarding LW, who had been born on 16 January 2016. The court criticised delays arising from the local authority's conduct and stressed the importance of making applications for public law proceedings in respect of new born babies timeously and especially, where the circumstances arguably required the removal of the child from its parent(s), within at most five days of the child's birth.
Divorce Financial provision. The Family Division ruled on a wife's application for general enforcement of a financial award (the order) made in her favour in 2005 and for a suspended order for the husband's committal to prison for his alleged failure to pay the amount awarded. The court ruled that the husband's breach of a subsequent mediation agreement had the result that that agreement fell away and his obligations under the order remained. The wife was awarded 624,886 plus interest, to be determined, up to a period of six years after the judgment debt. On the facts, the court declined to make an order for the husband's committal to prison.
Divorce Ancillary relief. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal by a husband against an ancillary relief order. The judge had not erred in awarding the wife more than 50% of the assets of the marriage, in circumstances where the husband had not made proper financial disclosure or provided a budget of his needs, and where the judge had made provision for the wife's trimmed budget whilst also providing properly for the husband's needs.
Family proceedings Jurisdiction. The Supreme Court, in allowing the appellant's appeal, held in a case determining whether the court had jurisdiction based on habitual residence of a child, that the modern concept of a child's habitual residence operated in the expectation that when a child had a new habitual residence, he lost his old one. Only a degree of integration was required in the new state. It was highly unlikely that a child would be left in limbo without a habitual residence.
Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court allowed the mother's application to relocate with her child back to Poland to live with the family on the basis that the state of the mother's mental health meant that it was in the child's best interest for the mother to have the support of her family in Poland.
Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed an appeal against a care order made in respect of an adopted boy. The judge had failed adequately to analyse the evidence or explain his reasons for reaching the conclusion that he had. There had been a number of issues that could have resulted in findings of fact which, had the judge made them, could have been considered in determining whether the boy could have returned to live with his parents.
Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division refused the application by the father, a convicted sex offender for contact with his son as no method of managing the kind of dangers that a convicted sex offender like the father might pose even to his own son had been put before the court. The mother's application for an order under of the Children Act 1989 would be refused as the present case was not one involving repeated applications. Nor had it displayed on the part of the father the kind of behaviour which, typically, founded a successful application for such an order.