RE C (CHILDREN) (2016)

The High Court could invoke its inherent jurisdiction to prevent a parent with parental responsibility from registering their child with the forename of their choice. The power was to be exercised only in the most extreme cases where the parent's choice of forename gave rise to reasonable cause to believe that the child would suffer … Continue reading RE C (CHILDREN) (2016)

Advertisements

MARY PATRICIA MUTCH v JAMES MUTCH (2016)

A judge had been wrong to find that he did not have the power to extend a spousal maintenance period. The original order had not excluded the wife's right to apply for such an extension, and on the evidence the application to extend had been made prior to the payment term ending. The wife appealed … Continue reading MARY PATRICIA MUTCH v JAMES MUTCH (2016)

RE N (CHILDREN) (2016)

The court considered the proper approach to determining applications to transfer care proceedings to foreign courts under Regulation 2201/2003 art.15. The issues of whether a court was "better placed" to hear proceedings and whether transfer was in the "best interests" of the child were separate questions which had to be addressed separately. If a foreign … Continue reading RE N (CHILDREN) (2016)

QS v RS (2015)

The High Court could exercise its inherent jurisdiction in proceedings concerning the custody of a child, who had been adopted in Nepal and was a British national resident in Dubai. The English court was the sole court which could remedy the non-recognisability of adoption at all under UAE law, and the fact that the Nepalese … Continue reading QS v RS (2015)

R (on the application of O) (Claimant) v PETERBOROUGH CITY COUNCIL (Defendant) & CAMBRIDGESHIRE & PETERBOROUGH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST (Interested party) (2016)

The claimant applied for judicial review of the defendant local authority's decision to make her the subject of a child protection plan (CPP).   The claimant was autistic and had started to refuse to eat or drink when she was six years old. A nasogastric tube was used to feed her. Her paediatrician, employed by … Continue reading R (on the application of O) (Claimant) v PETERBOROUGH CITY COUNCIL (Defendant) & CAMBRIDGESHIRE & PETERBOROUGH NHS FOUNDATION TRUST (Interested party) (2016)

IN THE MATTER OF THE BARONETCY OF PRINGLE OF STICHILL (2016)

In a reference under the Judicial Committee Act 1833 s.4, the board was required to advise Her Majesty as to who was entitled to be entered onto the Official Roll of the Baronetage as the Baronet of Pringle of Stichill and whether DNA evidence was admissible to determine the question. The baronetcy, which was governed … Continue reading IN THE MATTER OF THE BARONETCY OF PRINGLE OF STICHILL (2016)

SUTTON LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL v (1) MH (2) RH (3) NH (2016)

The local authority applied for a care order under the Children Act 1989 Pt IV in respect of the third respondent 16-year-old boy. The boy was born in South Africa and later moved to Canada. In 2012 he moved to Switzerland with his mother. He was sent to boarding school in Zimbabwe and later attended … Continue reading SUTTON LONDON BOROUGH COUNCIL v (1) MH (2) RH (3) NH (2016)