Re A and others (children) (care orders: care plans)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. None of the final care plans proposed by the local authority for five children could be approved. The Family Court held that, before they could be approved, it was important to know whether the present foster carers were willing to offer a long-term home either for the older four children or just for the eldest child and that before the plans to separate the older four children could be properly evaluated, there needed to be an expert assessment of the children by an appropriately experienced child psychologist.

A Local Authority v JA and others (ZK and another intervening)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. In the applicant local authority's application for care orders in respect of two children aged 13 and 12, the Family Court made all of the principal findings of fact sought by the authority. It would have to determine, in due course, the appropriate future long-term placements in their welfare best interests of the children.


Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The terms of a child arrangements order were varied in circumstances where prior to the present proceedings the youngest child, JL, had been living in Australia with the mother and the eldest child, IL, had been living in England with the father. The Family Court, in considering and balancing the harm that would come to IL if ordered to go to Australia and live with his mother, against the harm that JL would suffer as a result of being ordered to come and live with his father in England, the balance of harm fell in favour of making a child arrangements order in favour of the father.

Borg v El-Zubaidy

Contempt of court Committal. The father was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment following the mother's allegations against him of six breaches of court orders, which had been designed to facilitate the return of two of his three children to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. The Family Division, in passing the sentence held that the criminal standard of proof had been established with all the allegations and that some had been serious breaches.

A Local Authority v A

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. It was necessary and proportionate that the youngest of six children be placed for adoption and the statutory test for dispensing with parental consent was clearly met, as the child's welfare throughout his life could only be achieved by the local authority's plan. With respect to the five older children, the Family Court approved an agreement that they should stay in foster care where they had been since December 2016 in the best interests of those children.

*Goldtrail Travel Ltd (in liquidation) v Onur Air Tasimacilik AS

Costs Payment into court. When considering whether the ability of a third party to provide funds could be taken into account in assessing the likelihood that a company could make a payment into court, the question had to be whether the company could raise the money and not whether the relevant shareholder could raise the money. The appropriate criterion to be applied was whether the appellant company had established on the balance of probabilities that no such funds would be made available to it, whether by its owner or by some other closely associated person, as would enable it to satisfy the requested condition. Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appellant company's appeal against a finding that its appeal against an earlier judgment would be dismissed, on the grounds that it could not make the required payment into court.

Southend Borough Council v CO and another

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The parents' right under art10 of the European Convention on Human Rights outweighed the children's right under art8 of the Convention when it came to the question of an online petition being taken down. The parents had created the petition following the grant of adverse care and placement orders involving the parents' four children. The Family Division held, amongst other things, that there was very little cogent evidence that each of the children or any of them would suffer embarrassment, much less emotional harm, if the petition remained online.

An NHS Hospital Trust v GM and others

Declaration Procedure. A declaration was made that it was in the best interests of 14-week-old baby, H, that his ventilation tube be removed. The Family Division held, amongst other considerations, that the medical evidence had been unanimous that H was going to die very soon and that there was no quality of life for H. Orders concerning reporting restrictions and the presence of the police at H's bedside at and around the time of his death were also made.

Re V (A Child) (Recognition of Foreign Adoption)

Family proceedings Adoption. The applicants, Nigerian nationals at the time resident in the United Kingdom in a temporary capacity, had applied for recognition of a Nigerian adoption order. The Family Court, following examination of all the relevant criteria for the recognition of foreign adoptions, acceded to the application.

Re CB (International Relocation: Domestic Abuse: Child Arrangements)

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The Family Court refused the father's application for contact with the child, CB, and the mother's application for the permanent removal of CB to Portugal. Instead, the matter was adjourned for five months, to give the father a time-limited opportunity to demonstrate that he could be a good parent to CB and could co-parent CB by way of taking courses-seeking help to deal with his behaviours. The issues of contact and relocation would be addressed at a later date following the five-month adjournment.