Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed an appeal by a couple (A and B) in respect of an order made that, a child born of a surrogate X, should live with X and her partner and should spend time with his father (A) and his father's partner (B) every two months. Parental responsibility would, however, be given to B.
Divorce Financial provision. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in refusing permission for a husband to appeal against a judge's decision refuse to vary a periodical payments order in favour of the wife, held that the judge had been well within a reasonable band of discretion and, considering the arguments that would have been deployed in an appeal, the prospective appeal had no real prospects of success.
Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court granted the father a residency order, with immediate effect, in respect of his daughter, IB, in circumstances where there had been a 14-month period where the father had been unable to see IB. The mother had not put IB's welfare first and to continue living with the mother would result in IB continuing to suffer harm.
Family provision Order. A McKenzie friend, B, was refused permission to appeal against a decision to exclude him from family proceedings after the judge had held, amongst other things, that B had been effecting the efficient administration of justice in his position as the McKenzie friend. The judge's decision had been based upon the appropriate principles and all relevant matters had been weighed in the balance with clear reasons given for the decision.
Contract Implied terms. The Chancery Division dismissed the claimant company's claims against the defendant Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) in relation to four interest rate derivative products which RBS sold to the claimant (the swaps). In particular, it rejected claims for rescission, damages arising out of RBS's representations and-or breaches of contract in connection with the sale of the swaps, the transfer of its business, and participation in and knowledge of the manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate rates.
Judgment Award. The Technology and Construction Court revisited its earlier proposal, in the main judgment, that a judgment sum awarded to Harlequin against Wilkins Kennedy should be temporarily placed in an escrow account. That proposal had been made in the light of the risk to investors and the fact that insolvency proceedings were ongoing in respect of the first claimant company in St. Vincent and the Grenadines. The court held that, given the nature of the relationship between the parties' solicitors, it would not be appropriate to order any sort of escrow account. Instead, the money was ordered to be paid into court. It was further held that, given that the currency in which the relevant loss had been felt was sterling, the sum subject to the award in the main judgment would be expressed in sterling, namely 7,443,821.12, plus interest. Costs were awarded to the first claimant, but reduced by 40% to reflect the fact that the first claimant had been successful only on part of one of three issues in the main proceedings.
Child Care. There had been no question that the threshold in the s31 had been crossed in circumstances where there had been the death at the hands of one parent of one of two children within their care, notwithstanding the exoneration of the other parent from failure to protect the child. The Family Court made such fact finding conclusions in proceedings where the local authority had applied for a care order in respect of the surviving child.
Court of Protection Practice. Following its previous judgment in which a civil restraint order had been made against the respondent, the Court of Protection dealt with matters remaining, including finalisation of outstanding orders, publication of the judgment and any application for permission.
Contempt of court Civil contempt. The Court of Protection considered, among other things, an application for the committal for 27 contempts of a solicitor and the firm of which she was a member, which were brought by F, who was the applicant nephew of a person whose affairs had been managed by the court. The court held that F's applications had not been made properly, that it would not extend its discretion to consider them and that they were entirely without merit. It further ordered that an extended civil restraint order would be made against F for two years with regard to the relevant proceedings.
Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, dismissed a father's appeal against a child arrangements order made in favour of the mother in respect of their child. The findings and conclusions made by the judge had been open to her on the totality of the evidence before her and it had been entirely within her discretion to have made the decision she had, namely, that the child should live with his mother and should spend time with his father. In no sense could that exercise of judicial discretion be said to have been flawed, erroneous or wrong.