This ruling followed at least nine years of parental alienation and children arrangement proceedings under the CA 1989 concerning four children (the eldest is now 18). Two judgments were published in anonymised form, but neither judgment when first published was anonymised in a manner reflecting the judge’s apparent intention. This appeal concerned the welfare judgment, …
Continue reading “Procedure – publication of judgment”
H failed in his application to stay divorce proceedings in England and Wales. The key issue for the court was that of forum conveniens. The parties married in India in March 2019 and W joined H in the UK in the September. They separated by around April 2022 (though they disagreed on exactly when). H …
Continue reading “Procedure – divorce; jurisdiction”
This brief CA ruling illustrates the difficulties family judges face in balancing potentially meritless, ill-conceived applications and the time pressures facing the system. A s31(1) CA order was made placing the children in LA care. They were currently in foster care. The judge made factual findings including a history of domestic violence, F’s criminal history, and …
Continue reading “Procedure – justice not seen to be done”
The appeal court ruling in Standish is likely to remain one of the most notable family cases in recent times, clarifying the notion of ‘matrimonialisation’. At issue was the correct application of the sharing principle in financial remedies cases where, particularly, there are non-matrimonial assets. This was a very high-value case with total wealth of …
Continue reading “Financial remedies – matrimonialisation”
The courts continue their drive to encourage more parties down the mediation path and avoid litigation if possible. Amendments to the FPR came into force on 29 April to strengthen attendance at MIAMs (attendance is required under s10(1) Children and Families Act 2014). Law Society guidance on the changes has now been released. The changes …
Continue reading “Procedure – mediation”
The LA applied for an order under the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007 (FMCPA) and for an order under the MCA 2005 that a current care plan was in AG’s best interests. An interim order had been in place while assessments into AG’s capacity were undertaken. AG, 24, had a mild learning disability, anxiety …
Continue reading “Forced marriages – protective orders”
A 16-year-old (Q) was born female but identifies as male. The (divorced) parents disagreed as to whether Q should access private treatment for gender dysphoria. M did not want Q having any gender-related medical treatment under the age of 18 but agreed to Q joining the NHS waiting list. She had applied for a prohibited …
Continue reading “Prohibited steps order – gender reassignment”
The parties (now 68 and 72) are both transgender and ‘married’ in 2009. In 2019, the High Court declared the marriage was void, but despite the declaration the applicant (A) sought a decree of nullity, believing he needed it to be able to legally marry. The parties ultimately married, in a valid ceremony, in February …
Continue reading “Transgender spouses – nullity”
The CA has warned that judges must be cautious when considering scientific research literature in detail. The parents of two children, aged six and two, were subject to care proceedings after one of the children suffered intercranial bleeding. The judge heard evidence over several days and the LA then decided to discontinue the proceedings. However, …
Continue reading “Expert evidence – care proceedings”
In this useful article, financial remedies specialist Andrew Newbury comments on two cases on the instruction of single joint experts (SJEs). An SJE is appointed by both parties to give evidence on the issue(s) in question (r25.11 FPR). In a 2024 case, the judge stated the default position: wherever possible, an SJE should be instructed …
Continue reading “Single joint experts – challenging the evidence”