Family Law Cases & Materials: August 2006

Compiled by Emily Beer, Barrister

Re O (children) CA 30.08.06
A father’s appeal against the finding he had caused injury to his son was dismissed. The CA held that while on the facts the judge had dealt inadequately with the medical evidence there was compelling evidence to support his conclusions.

Re: L (Children) (Threshold Criteria) CA 25.08.06

An appeal against Care Orders was allowed where the LA had removed children on the basis of third party allegations of physical abuse, which were not borne out, and subsequently sought to run the case on the basis of the parents’ low intelligence.

R (on the application of W) v Lincolnshire County Council QBD 24.08.06

While they had not followed the recommendations of 2:1 care set out in an expert report Lincolnshire CC had not been perverse or irrational, or otherwise unlawful, in setting a care plan for a 17-year-old suffering from a degenerative disease.

Re S (a child) Re E (a child) (s.91(14) Orders) CA 18.08.06

A court making an order under the Children Act 1989 s. 91(14) is not permitted to attach conditions to the order beyond stating its duration and identifying the type of relief to which it applied. Such orders may be made without limit of time or until a relevant child attained the age of 16 but this should be the exception rather than the rule and full reasons set out clearly.

Wilkinson v Kitzinger Fam Div 31.07.06

To the extent that by reason of not according Civil Partnerships the name ‘marriage’ The Civil Partnership Act 2004 discriminated against same-sex partners, that discrimination had a legitimate aim, was reasonable and proportionate and fell within the margin of appreciation accorded to Convention states.

Charman v Charman Fam Div 27.07.06
Held that this was a case where, wholly exceptionally, the wealth created was of extraordinary proportions from H’s extraordinary talent and energy. Therefore in taking s.25 MCA 1973 into account W was entitled to £48m representing just under 37% of the parties’ total assets.

Practice Direction (Family Proceedings) (Court Bundles) 27.07.06
The President of the Family Division has issued this practice direction to achieve consistency across the country in all family courts (other than the Family Proceedings Court) in the preparation of court bundles and in respect of other related matters. This replaces President’s Direction (Family Proceedings: Court Bundles) [2000] 1 FLR 536 and shall have effect from 2 October 2006. Failure to comply with any part of this practice direction “may result in the judge removing the case from the list or putting the case further back in the list and may also result in a wasted costs order in accordance with CPR 48.7 or some other adverse costs order”. It can be found at: www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/479.htm