Re C (a child); (refusal to make interim care order)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court declined to make an interim care order in respect of a child C who had been living with the maternal grandmother and in contact with her mother despite the fact that the mother had serious drug addiction issues. Although the criteria for making an interim care order under the of the Children Act 1989 was satisfied however in the exercise of the court's discretion C's welfare demanded that C nevertheless be left in the care of the maternal grandmother.

Re C (A child)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court held that it was in the best interests of an eleven-year-old child, C, to remain in the care of his maternal aunt. It accordingly made a child arrangements order in favour of the aunt, which provided that C would live with her, and which would also confer on the aunt parental responsibility in respect of C for the duration of the order.

Rosa v Secretary of State for the Home Department

Immigration European Economic Area nationals. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal against a finding of the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (FTT) that the appellant Brazilian national had entered into a marriage of convenience with a Portuguese national in order to re-enter and remain in the United Kingdom. While the legal burden of proof lay on the Secretary of State throughout, the evidential burden could shift. The errors in law made by the FTT had not been material to the outcome.

*Re D (A Child) (No 3)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court accepted and agreed with the evidence of the local authority and the children's guardian that the two year old child, D's, welfare needs could not be met by remaining with his parents. The parents, because of their own difficulties, were unable to meet his specialist needs and to provide the stimulation and skilled parenting he needed. Accordingly, a placement order would be made, the parents consent having been dispensed with.


Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division made rulings concerning, among other things, the mother's application to increase periodical payments for her son and the father's cross-application to strike out a number of claims made by the mother relating to providing for their son, C, who was seven years old. The court held that, with the exception of points relating to the trustee of and upkeep of the house where the mother lived, the issues in the application were not justiciable and would be dismissed.

Re E (A Child) (Child arrangements order) (S91(14) Application)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled on a father's appeal against child arrangements orders and an order made pursuant to s91(14) of the . It held, among other things, that, in respect of the s 91(14) order alone, it was clear that the father had not had sufficient notice of the application that had been made and the manner in which it had been made had not complied with case law or proper procedure. On that one issue, the appeal would be allowed.

R (on the application of MM (by his mother and litigation friend, TM)) v Hounslow London Borough Council

Local government Statutory powers. The Administrative Court dismissed the claimant autistic 15-year-old's judicial review proceedings, alleging that the defendant local authority's assessment had underestimated his and his mother's needs, and had failed to make proper provision for how those needs were to be met. Further, the authority had not breached its statutory duty to produce a care plan, as it would have been premature until the present proceedings had been determined.

H (Mother) v C (Father) and another

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, ruled on an appeal against the refusal of permission to a mother of two boys, then aged 16 and 14, to take them from London to live in New York. To the extent that the appeal was allowed in the case of the eldest son and, to a limited extent, the younger son, it was on a basis not argued below, namely, in consequence of the 'no order' principle the court should not have been making or continuing orders about young persons over 16, other than in exceptional circumstances.

Chai v Peng

Divorce Jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed a husband's appeal against the refusal of a stay of the wife's divorce petition in circumstances where he had also commenced divorce proceedings in Malaysia. The judge had not misunderstood the decision of the Malaysian Court of Appeal regarding the proper forum of the dispute, there had been no abuse of process on the wife's part and the judge had correctly applied the relevant law.

Re W; Re F (Children)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in allowing the appellant's appeal against findings made in the course of care proceedings that he had sexually abused three children, held that no court could have reasonably found that he had abused any of those children on the basis of the evidence adduced before the recorder.