Know-how, update and training for the private family lawyer. Click here to find out more..
New to watch
Income Tax & SDLT on Divorce
Capital Gains Tax in Divorce: A Refresher
Private Children Cases review 2019
Covert Recording in Family Cases: A Practical Guide
New to read
-
Re A (Children) [2019] EWCA Civ 74
In a tweet: Mother’s (“M”) appeal allowed in respect of private law child proceedings in which she alleged she had been “stranded” by the father (“F”) in Pakistan. Case note, 13/09/2019, members only -
A and B and C (by her Children’s Guardian) [2018] EWHC 3834
An application for the child to be made a ward of the court and for a child arrangements order was rejected. Case note, 13/09/2019, members only -
Re X (Wardship) (Foreign Proceedings: Child’s Evidence) [2019] EWHC 91
An application brought by the paternal aunt and uncle for permission to remove the child from the jurisdiction of England and Wales, in order to give evidence in a criminal trial. Case note, 13/09/2019, members only -
L and M [2019] EWHC 219
In a tweet: Unsuccessful application brought by father of twin boys for their return from China to this jurisdiction pursuant to inherent jurisdiction of the High Court. Case note, 13/09/2019, members only -
H (A Child) [2019] EWHC 1509 (Fam)
The mother wrongfully removed the son to the UK. Her application for asylum on the basis of being a victim of domestic violence was granted on appeal. The father was applying under the Hague Convention for summary return, and in this hearing applied for disclosure of the asylum files relating to the mother and child, contending that his Article 6 and 8 rights could not otherwise be preserved. The Secretary of State for the Home Department resisted disclosure. HHJ Corbett was satisfied that the impact of disclosure upon the asylum process would outweigh the impact of non-disclosure on the Article 6 and 8 rights of the father and child. The application for disclosure was refused. Judgment, 05/09/2019, free -
New Webinar: Eliminate the ‘He Said/She Said’ – Improve communication and keep parents accountable in moderate and high conflict cases
To be broadcast 1pm, Wednesday 9th October 2019. News, 02/09/2019, free -
Moher v Moher [2019] EWCA Civ 1482
The husband appealed from a financial remedy order, arguing that it contained neither a sufficient evaluation of his undisclosed financial resources nor a sufficient explanation for the award of a £1.4 million lump sum. Moylan LJ noted that the absence of a structured s 25 analysis in the judgment below, or of an exposition of how the award was calculated, had provided scope for the appeal. He did not accept, however, that a judge is required to provide a figure or bracket in every case when confronted by non-disclosure. In this case, the judge's determination of the husband's resources had been sufficient, and the award was based on a sound assessment of the wife's needs. King LJ and Rose LJ agreed and the appeal was dismissed. Judgment, 30/08/2019, free -
Z v Y [2019] EWHC 2255 (Fam)
The father would not give consent for his seven-year-old daughter to have brain surgery to alleviate her drug resistant epilepsy, and so the mother applied for a specific issue order. There was a 1 in 2 chance of the procedure being successful. The risk to the child's life could be as high as 1 in 500, but there was a 1 in 250 risk to her life each year from the epilepsy if uncontrolled. Taking all matters into account, and guided by the paramount question of the child's welfare, Gwynneth Knowles J made a specific issue order to the effect that the surgery should take place. Judgment, 18/08/2019, free
