Bloomsbury Family Law Briefing: January Teaser

Case summaries



Re A (Jurisdiction: Family Law Act 1986) (Application for Amplification) [2021] EWFC 105 (15 December 2021), Poole J – Refusal of preliminary issue application as to whether the English court could hear an application concerning two children each with parents living in different countries.

Re M (A Child) [2021] EWHC 3225 (Fam) (1 December 2021), Judd J – Appeal allowed where the court did not take proper account of the extent of the vulnerability of the mother applicant under FPR 2010, Pt 3A and PD3AA.

GK v PR [2021] EWFC 106 (14 December 2021), Peel J – Appeal allowed where the recorder below had not taken proper account of FPR 2010, Pt 3A and of GK's vulnerability, and of appropriate special measures. The judge could not be confident that GK was able to give evidence in the best possible way. Judicial comment on over-long skeleton arguments.

Austin v Haynes [2021] EWCA Civ 1919 (15 December 2021) – Payer husband’s charging order appeal refused. Charging order made without notice; but where a separate application is made for a charging order provide, an application can be made without notice (FPR 2010, r 40.4(1)).

Griffiths v Tickle & ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1882 (10 December 2021) – A father’s unsuccessful appeal that his name (the mother’s name was to be published, but she did not appeal) be published in connection with children proceedings.

LS v PS and Q [2021] EWHC 3508 (Fam) (23 December 2021), Roberts J – Application refused for disclosure of without prejudice correspondence between parties by Q as interveners in parties’ financial relief proceedings, and as funders of W’s financial relief application.



Strike out of family proceedings



The power of the family courts to strike out a case is rarely used; but the power is there. It is available in appropriate cases. Even if a case is not struck out, an application may be used as a means of case managing a particular application, for example where there has been exceptional delay in a financial relief case (as explained by Lord Wilson in Wyatt v Vince [2015] UKSC 14, [2015] 1 WLR 1228, [2015] 1 FLR 972, and as discussed later).

This article shows how the family proceedings strike out jurisdiction compares with civil proceedings cases and how the strike out application is applied for. It considers in particular how delay can affect any application and its case management even if the application is refused.

The Family Law Briefing is part of the Bloomsbury Law Online Service. The full briefing is available here.

David Burrows

Written by David Burrows

Subscribe to the Bloomsbury Professional Law Newsletter

Law Online

Bloomsburyprofessionallaw Online research for solicitors and barristers practising in English law Free Trial

Need Help?

Bloomsburyprofessionallaw If you need any help with finding publications or just ask a question. Talk to an Advisor: 01444 416119
customerservices@bloomsburyprofessional.com
or send us a message