Monday, October 26, 2015

News Essentials: 26th October 2015

A brief summary of the essential family law news and cases from the last week:

Court of Appeal allows appeal in deprivation of liberty case, criticises judge
The Court of Appeal has allowed an appeal in a case over whether a woman was being deprived of her liberty in her own home, and in the process criticised a High Court judge who maintains that the majority decision in the Supreme Court’s Cheshire West ruling is wrong. Full story: Local Government Lawyer. See also the law report (KW & Ors v Rochdale MBC) below.

70% fewer civil partnerships in 2014
The number of civil partnerships created dropped from 5,646 in 2013 to 1,683 in 2014, according to the latest bulletin from the Office of National Statistics.Full story: Family Law Hub.

Record number of families helped by adoption support fund
More than 2,000 families being helped through life-changing government fund worth over £7 million in the past 6 months. Full story: Department for Education.

Tickle v Council of the Borough of North Tyneside & Ors [2015] EWHC 2991 (Fam) (19 October 2015)
Cross-applications by journalist seeking permission to report care proceedings and by local authority seeking a reporting restriction order. Full report: Bailii.

H v H [2015] EWHC B24 (Fam) (27 November 2014)
Application by wife under section 27 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Full report: Bailii.

KW & Ors v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council [2015] EWCA Civ 1054 (20 October 2015)
Appeal in case concerning deprivation of liberty of 52 year old severely mentally incapacitated woman. Full report: Bailii.

Medway Council v M & T (By Her Children's Guardian) [2015] EWFC B164 (13 October 2015)
Applications by child and mother within care proceedings for damages relating to unlawful accommodation of child by local authority. Full report: Bailii.

*      *      *

For more news, see here.

For more cases, see here.

To subscribe to the Family Lore Focus free weekly Newsletter, go here.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.