Re G (A Child)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court ruled that the evidence did not allow a finding of direct sexual abuse by the father or the mother in respect of a nine-year-old boy with autism. However, it found that it was likely that the child had seen inappropriate things and, in the light of the mother's deteriorating mental health, and, where the parents had conceded that the threshold had been crossed on the basis of emotional and physical abuse, it ruled that the child should move to live with his paternal grandparents, as proposed by the local authority and supported by the grandparents and the guardian.

Re A, B, C and F (Children)

Children and young persons Jurisdiction. The Family Division held that where there had been wrongful retention by the father of the children in Somalia that wrongful retention did not change the fact that the children had habitual residence in the United Kingdom and therefore the courts of England and Wales had jurisdiction in regard to an application to return the children to the UK having regard to .

Al-Baker v Al-Baker

Practice Family proceedings. The Family Division dismissed a wife's application, in the course of ancillary proceedings, for a reference to be made to the police of her allegation against her husband of perjury concerning disclosure of assets and for documents to be disclosed to the police in support of that application. The court ruled that the application was premature and that it would be wholly wrong for it to refer matters to the police in advance of its judgment on those matters.

Re Z (Foreign Surrogacy: Allocation of Work: Guidance on Parental Order Reports)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court gave guidance on the allocation of cases of international surrogacy; specifically that all applications for parental orders when the child or children were born outside the UK were to be allocated (not transferred) to be heard by a judge of the High Court. The guidance extended to the role and investigations to be carried out by the parental order reporter; specifically that, in order to complete the parental order report, the child had to be seen with the applicants by the reporter to enable her-him to assess the child's welfare satisfactorily, in all circumstances except if there was judged to be sufficient independent evidence.

Re X (No 2: Application for contact by the biological father)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court refused an application for direct contact with a child, who had been conceived through artificial insemination at the respondent civil partners' home, with the first respondent using the applicant's sperm. Indirect contact once a year met the child's present welfare needs to have information about her biological father.

*Re N (Children) (Adoption: Jurisdiction)

Family proceedings Jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing a local authority's appeal against transfer of a public law family case to Hungary, answered questions regarding the jurisdiction of the English court in cases involving foreign children habitually resident in England and who had foreign parents who did not consent to their adoption, the scope of (Brussels II Revised) as it applied to both care and placement proceedings and the requirements that had to be met before the court could request a transfer to another member state.

Re T (A Child)

Adoption Order. The Family Division held that it had jurisdiction in respect of a child adopted in Nepal and granted British Citizenship but living in Dubai by virtue of the inherent jurisdiction of the court and for the purposes of the father's application in wardship proceedings in respect of the child.

Re A and B (Contact) (No 4)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Division made a child arrangements order for indirect contact in favour of the biological father of two children and his male partner. The court further ordered that a preamble about the biological father's entitlement to the children's school reports would be attached to the final order and it made an order restricting further applications, under of the Children Act 1989.

Re D (Children) (Abduction)

Minor Custody. The Family Division, on a mother's application under the Hague Conventionon the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction 1980 and , ordered the summary return to France of her three children. The mother's words in email exchanges had not amounted to 'a clear and unequivocal consent' and, even if they had been, manifestly that consent had been withdrawn before the children had been retained.

Bristol City Council v AA and another

Family proceedings Care order. The Family Division granted a care order in respect of a Lithuanian child living in the United Kingdom, having found that the best option was for the child to remain in long-term foster care with his current carers.