News Essentials: 4th November 2019
A brief summary of the essential family law news and cases from the last week:
NEWS
Judge criticises council for breaching duty of disclosure when making streamlined application for authorisation of deprivation of liberty
A council has been criticised by a Court of Protection judge for breaching the duty of full and frank disclosure when it made an application under the streamlined procedure for authorisation of a deprivation of liberty. Full story: Local Government Lawyer.
President of the Family Division: Guidance as to reporting in the Family Courts
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has issued the latest guidance for reporting in the Family Courts. Full story: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
CASES
S (A Child: Adequacy of Reasoning), Re [2019] EWCA Civ 1845 (31 October 2019)
Appeal following fact finding hearing in care proceedings. Appeal allowed, on the basis that the judge's conclusions as eventually expressed were inadequately reasoned. Full report: Bailii.
NY (A Child), Re [2019] UKSC 49 (30 October 2019)
Appeal by mother against order made under inherent jurisdiction requiring her to return child to Israel. Appeal allowed. Full report: Bailii.
FRB v DCA [2019] EWHC 2816 (Fam) (28 October 2019)
Application by wife to strike out husband's claim for damages in respect of W's deceit in maintaining that he was the father of W's child. Full report: Bailii.
Begum v Ahmed [2019] EWCA Civ 1794 (28 October 2019)
Appeal against refusal of application to make inheritance claim out of time. Appeal allowed. Full report: Bailii.
* * *
For more news, see here.For more cases, see here.
To subscribe to the Family Lore Focus free weekly Newsletter (which includes links to all of the week's top family law news stories, cases, articles and blog posts), go here.
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.