Bloomsbury Family Law Briefing: November Teaser

Case Summaries 

ES v LS [2021] EWHC 2758 (Fam) (18 October 2021), Mostyn J – Refusal of return of children to Latvia in which the judge warned of over-evidencing and -pleading of summary return child abduction cases.

Lincolnshire County Council v CB & ors [2021] EWHC 2813 (Fam) (21 October 2021), Leiven J – Case management decision on whether judicial and court resources justified a ‘fact finding’ hearing (of up to 20 days) over the death of an 11-year-old with cerebral palsy. A fact-finding hearing was not ‘necessary’. Judicial resources did not permit this.

Re W (A Child) [2021] EWHC 2844 (Fam) (25 October 2021) Hayden J – The 12-year-old W has serious disabilities which required a wheelchair at all times. ‘Rather than looking to change the parents’ the judge proposed on psychologist’s advice a systemic intervention drawn from organisational psychology, psychodynamic psychotherapy etc.

An NHS Trust v D (A Minor : Out of Hours Application) [2021] EWHC 2676 (Fam) (5 October 2021), MacDonald J – Out of hours application, properly made, for treatment of a 16-year-old who may have taken an overdose of paracetamol, and for such restraint of her liberty to be imposed as is necessary.

Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su & ors [2021] EWHC 2702 (Comm) (8 October 2021), Bryan J – Wasted costs application refused in substantial litigation by judge who had heard the case. The court did not need substantial evidence and submissions at ‘Stage 1’ (to say whether there was an application to answer), which here was refused.

Kaur v Bolina & anor [2021] EWHC 2894 (Fam) (29 October 2021), Cobb J – ‘On a fine balance’ ([37]) applicant widow of the deceased allowed to proceed with her claim under IPFDA 1975 though commenced five months late.

Opinion evidence in family proceedings

The article this month comments on the President’s Memorandum: experts in the family court of 4 October 2021 and then conducts a brief review of the common law in relation to opinion evidence. Mostly the memorandum seeks to seeks to explain what is meant by ‘to assist the court’ in the context of an expert opinion witness giving evidence to family courts. The article recalls the statutory position of experts and their evidence under Civil Evidence Act 1972, s 3 and the importance of impartiality of experts and of their role in assisting the court.

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