Results: 28

• Mazhar v Lord Chancellor

  12 Oct 2017 [2017] EWHC 2536 (Fam); [2018] Fam 257; [2018] 2 WLR 1304; [2017] WLR(D) 680, Fam D (Ryder LJ sitting as a High Court judge)

  02 Oct 2019 [2019] EWCA Civ 1558; [2021] Fam 103; [2020] 2 WLR 541; [2020] 1 All ER 246; [2019] WLR (D) 533, CA (Sir Terence Etherton MR, Singh, Baker LJJ)

  Subsequent citations: 9.
  HUMAN RIGHTS — Breach of Convention rights — Judicial act

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Claimant alleging decision of judge breaching his Convention rights — Whether open to claimant to bring claim for declaration to that effect
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Breach of Convention rights — Judicial act — Judge authorising removal of claimant to hospital under inherent jurisdiction — Claimant seeking declaration against Lord Chancellor that removal and detention unlawful and constituting breach of Convention rights by judicial act — Whether power to grant declaratory relief against Crown in respect of judicial act — Means by which claim for damages for breach of Convention right by judicial act to be brought — Whether court of co-ordinate jurisdiction able to hear claim — Whether Lord Chancellor vicariously liable for judicial act — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), ss 6, 7(1)(a), 8(1), 9(1)(c)(3), Sch 1, Pt I, arts 5, 6, 8 — CPR r 7.11

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Breach of Convention rights — Judicial act — Judge authorising removal of claimant to hospital under inherent jurisdiction — Claimant bringing claim seeking declaration against Lord Chancellor that removal constituting unlawful breach of Convention rights — Whether open to claimant to bring claim for declaratory relief against Crown in respect of judicial act — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), ss 7, 9, Sch 1, Pt I, art 5 — CPR r 7.11

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Claimant alleging decision of judge breaching his Convention rights — Whether open to claimant to bring claim for declaration to that effect

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Breach of Convention rights — Judicial act — Judge authorising removal of claimant to hospital under inherent jurisdiction — Claimant bringing claim seeking declaration against Lord Chancellor that removal and detention constituting unlawful breach of Convention rights — Whether open to claimant to bring claim for declaratory relief against Crown in respect of judicial act — Means by which claim for damages for breach of Convention right by judicial act to be brought — Whether court of co-ordinate jurisdiction able to hear claim — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), ss 7, 9, Sch 1, Pt I, art 5 — CPR r 7.11

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• A Local Authority v JB

  17 Sep 2019 [2019] EWCOP 39; [2020] 1 WLR 1; [2020] 2 All ER 992; [2019] WLR (D) 517, Ct of Protection (Roberts J)

  11 Jun 2020 [2020] EWCA Civ 735; [2021] Fam 37; [2020] 3 WLR 1014; [2021] 1 All ER 1103; [2021] 1 FLR 264; [2020] WLR (D) 336, CA (Sir Andrew McFarlane P, Singh, Baker LJJ)

  13 Apr 2021 Permission to appeal to Supreme Court given

  24 Nov 2021 (Respond intervening) [2021] UKSC 52; [2021] 3 WLR 1381; The Times, 28 December 2021, SC(E) (Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Burrows, Lord Stephens, Lady Rose JJSC)

  Subsequent citations: 21.
  MENTAL DISORDER — Capacity — Consent to sexual relations

  MENTAL DISORDER — Capacity — Sexual relations
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  MENTAL DISORDER — Capacity — Consent to sexual relations — Whether “information relevant to the decision” including understanding of extent to which non-consensual sexual relations might be criminal — Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9), s 3(1)

  MENTAL DISORDER — Capacity — Consent to sexual relations — Adult with impaired cognition wishing to initiate sexual relations with women — Whether having capacity to engage in sexual relations — Whether “information relevant to the decision” including understanding of valid and continuing consent — Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9), s 3

  MENTAL DISORDER — Capacity — Sexual relations — Adult with impaired cognition wishing to initiate sexual relations with women — Whether having capacity to engage in sexual relations — Whether “information relevant to the decision” including that consent of other party necessary — Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9), ss 2, 3

  14 Case(s) considered

  2 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered
• In re H (A Child) (In re T (A Child) (Immunizations), Tower Hamlets London Borough Council v M)

  07 Feb 2020 [2020] EWHC 220 (Fam); [2020] 1 FCR 780, Fam D (Hayden J)

  22 May 2020 [2020] EWCA Civ 664; [2021] Fam 133; [2020] 3 WLR 1049; [2021] 2 All ER 288; [2020] 2 FLR 753; [2020] WLR (D) 308, CA (McCombe, King, Peter Jackson LJJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 3 positive. Subsequent citations: 9.
  CHILDREN — Inherent jurisdiction — Immunizations

  CHILDREN — Care proceedings — Immunisation
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Inherent jurisdiction — Immunizations

  CHILDREN — Care proceedings — Immunisation — Local authority obtaining care order in respect of child — Parents objecting to child receiving routine vaccinations in line with public health recommendations — Whether local authority having power to consent to vaccinations notwithstanding parents’ objections — Whether local authority required to apply to High Court for order under inherent jurisdiction authorising vaccinations — Children Act 1989 (c 41), ss 33(3), 100

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• MS v RS

  22 Apr 2020 [2020] EWFC 30; [2021] Fam 1; [2020] 3 WLR 1233; [2020] 2 FLR 689; [2020] WLR (D) 246, Fam Ct (MacDonald J)

  Subsequent citations: 3.
  CHILDREN — Declaration of parentage — Presumption of legitimacy
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Declaration of parentage — Presumption of legitimacy — Father’s application for declaration of non-parentage — Standard of proof required to rebut common law presumption of legitimacy — Whether in children’s best interests for court to determine application — Family Law Reform Act 1969 (c 46), s 26 — Family Law Act 1986 (c 55), s 55A

  5 Case(s) considered

  2 Statutes considered

• In re Y (Children)

  06 Aug 2020 [2020] EWCA Civ 1038; [2021] Fam 199; [2021] 2 WLR 237; [2021] 1 FLR 484; [2020] WLR(D) 460, CA (McCombe, King, Peter Jackson LJJ)

  26 Feb 2021 (appn dis) [2021] 1 WLR 2072, SC(E) ( Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Leggatt, Lord Stephens JJSC)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  CHILDREN — Care proceedings — Parental responsibility
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Care proceedings — Parental responsibility — Children of Indian nationality made subjects of care orders — Local authority intending to apply for British citizenship on behalf of children to regularise immigration status — Grant of British citizenship having effect of extinguishing Indian nationality — Parents withholding consent to application — Whether local authority empowered to make citizenship application in exercise of parental responsibility arising under care order — Whether application requiring approval from High Court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction — Children Act 1989 (c 41), ss 33, 100

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered
• Haley v Haley (R v K)

  27 Feb 2020 [2020] EWHC 841 (Fam); [2020] WLR(D) 531, Fam D (Clare Ambrose sitting as a deputy High Court judge)

  23 Oct 2020 [2020] EWCA Civ 1369; [2021] Fam 317; [2021] 2 WLR 357; [2021] 1 FLR 1429; [2020] WLR(D) 570, CA (King, Moylan, Popplewell LJJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 3.
  MARRIAGE — Divorce — Financial provision
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  MARRIAGE — Divorce — Financial provision — Family Law Arbitration Scheme — Parties agreeing to submit dispute in financial proceedings arising from divorce to arbitration — Wife seeking incorporation of arbitral award in court order — Husband seeking permission to appeal award and to set it aside for procedural irregularity — Appropriate test for permission to appeal arbitration award — Whether permission to appeal to be granted — Whether court to exercise discretion not to approve order in terms of award — Whether order to be made — Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (c 18), s 25(1)(2) (as substituted by Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (c 42), s 3) — Arbitration Act 1996 (c 23), ss 68, 69(3) — FPR Pt 30

  MARRIAGE — Divorce — Financial provision — Family Law Arbitration Financial Scheme — Parties agreeing to submit dispute in financial remedy proceedings to arbitration — Husband seeking order that final order not made in accordance with terms of arbitral award — Proper approach to exercise of court’s discretion to decline to make order in accordance with terms of arbitral award — Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (c 18), s 25 — Arbitration Act 1996 (c 23), ss 68, 69 — FPR Pt 30

  6 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered
• Akhter v Khan (Attorney General intervening) (Attorney General v Akhter)

  31 Jul 2018 [2018] EWFC 54; [2019] Fam 247; [2019] 2 WLR 771; [2019] 1 FLR 575; [2018] WLR (D) 526, Fam Ct (Williams J)

  14 Feb 2020 [2020] EWCA Civ 122; [2021] Fam 277; [2020] 2 WLR 1183; [2020] 2 FLR 139; [2020] WLR (D) 95, CA (Sir Terence Etherton MR, King, Moylan LJJ)

  06 Aug 2020 (appn dis) [2020] 1 WLR 4007, SC(E) (Lady Black, Lord Briggs, Lord Kitchin JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; most recently considered: 2020. Subsequent citations: 10.
  MARRIAGE — Validity — Void marriage
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  MARRIAGE — Validity — Void marriage — Islamic marriage ceremony not complying with statutory requirements — Parties subsequently living as married couple for many years — Whether presumption that parties undergoing valid marriage ceremony during years of cohabitation — Whether Islamic ceremony giving rise to void marriage or wholly invalid marriage — Whether jurisdiction to grant decree of nullity — Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (c 18), s 11(a)(iii) (as amended by Marriage Act 1983 (c 32), s 12(1), Marriage (Prohibited Degrees of Relationship) Act 1986 (c 16), s 6(4) and Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 (Consequential and Contrary Provisions and Scotland) and Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Act 2014 (Consequential Provisions) Order 2014 (SI 2014/3168), Sch 1, para 6(2))

  MARRIAGE — Validity — Void marriage — Islamic marriage ceremony not complying with statutory requirements — Whether giving rise to void marriage or no marriage at all — Whether jurisdiction to grant decree of nullity — Marriage Act 1949 (12, 13 & 14 Geo 6, c 76), s 49 — Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (c 18), s 11 — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, arts 8, 12, Pt II, art 1 — United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) (Cm 1976), art 3.1

  4 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered

  1 International Agreement considered
• In re G (Children)

  09 Feb 2021 [2021] EWCA Civ 139; [2021] Fam 239; [2021] 2 WLR 1013; [2021] 2 FLR 972; [2021] WLR(D) 87, CA (Peter Jackson, Baker, Nugee LJJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 25.
  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Breach
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Breach — Mother removing children from Romania to England after father giving consent — Father subsequently applying for summary return of children on basis consent withdrawn prior to removal — Whether possible to withdraw “consent” to removal without knowledge of other party — Proper approach to exercise of discretion to order return where not mandatory — Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 (c 60), Sch 1, art 13

  1 Case considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered

• JM v RM

  22 Feb 2021 [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam); [2021] Fam 261; [2021] 2 WLR 1032; [2022] 1 FLR 243; [2021] WLR(D) 122, Fam D (Mostyn J)

  Subsequent citations: 9.
  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Breach
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Custody rights — Breach — Mother taking children habitually resident in Australia to England for fixed period with father’s consent — Mother unable to return children at end of agreed period due to Covid-19 restrictions — No alternative date for children’s return agreed — Father subsequently applying for summary return of children — Whether wrongful retention of children requiring clearly agreed due date of return — Whether father “acquiescing in” retention — Child Abduction and Custody Act 1985 (c 60), Sch 1, arts 12, 13

  3 Case(s) considered

  1 Words & Phrases considered

  1 Statute considered
• In re M (A Child) (In re A (A Child) (Inherent Jurisdiction: Parens Patriae, FMPO & Passport Orders))

  27 Feb 2020 [2020] EWHC 451 (Fam), Fam D (Judge Moradifar sitting as a High Court judge)

  17 Jul 2020 [2020] EWCA Civ 922; [2021] Fam 163; [2020] 3 WLR 1175; [2021] 1 FLR 415; [2020] WLR(D) 419, CA (Henderson, Moylan, Baker LJJ)

  05 Oct 2020 (appn dis) [2021] 1 WLR 471, SC(E) (Lady Black, Lord Briggs, Lord Burrows JJSC)

  Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; 1 neutral; most recently considered: 2021. Subsequent citations: 20.
  CHILDREN — Wardship — Inherent jurisdiction

  CHILDREN — Inherent jurisdiction — Wardship
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CHILDREN — Wardship — Inherent jurisdiction

  CHILDREN — Inherent jurisdiction — Wardship — Mother applying for wardship order in respect of British national child living in Algeria — Judge exercising inherent jurisdiction to make child ward of court and order child’s return to England for assessment of her best interests — Circumstances in which exercise of inherent jurisdiction justified

  3 Case(s) considered