Bloomsbury Family Law Briefing: October Teaser

Cases

Re G (A Child: Child Abduction) [2020] EWCA Civ 1185 (15 September 2020) – F’s appeal allowed, on his application for return of a child (eight) to South Africa: interplay of Hague Convention and asylum jurisdiction fully reviewed by the court.

Hinson v Hare Realizations Ltd (2) [2020] EWHC 2386 (QB) (7 September 2020), Martin Spencer J – Confirming Daniels v Walker [2000] EWCA Civ 508, [2000] 1 WLR 1382: if for reasons ‘not fanciful’, and subject to ‘discretion of the court’, the court had jurisdiction to permit instruction of a further expert beyond any single joint expert already appointed.

Re A (A Child) [2020] EWCA Civ 1230 (22 September 2020) – Judge’s finding that F of nine-year-old had poisoned his partner’s father (killed) and her mother and her, and deliberately hidden information from the medics. Remitted to a Family Division judge.

AB v AN & anor [2020] EWHC 2048 (Fam) (28 July 2020), Lieven J – Mothers for a female genital mutilation protection order for her daughter (EO) against the father and his mother, in Nigeria Lieven J refused to make an immediate order, and adjourned for a further hearing before her. There was no immediate risk to EO.

Akhmedova v Akhmedov & ors [2020] EWHC 2235 (Fam) (14 August 2020), Knowles J – (1) Refusal to two of the defendant in this enforcement litigation of a stay in proceedings, to await their outstanding Lichtenstein litigation; and (2) refusal to vary a freezing order on bank accounts made by Haddon-Cave J in the original lump sum litigation. Full citation of authority provided by Knowles J.

Practice directions, practice ‘guidance’ and other family law measures

Article

Practice directions and other lesser quasi legislative measures are surprisingly important in the contact of family proceedings; but to what extent are each binding on the courts and the parties? A criterion for looking at each is the extent to which individual each category is – or is not – made formally under statutory powers. For example, measures such as President’s guidances, protocols etc may be persuasive (like obiter dicta); but they are, strictly speaking, of no statutory or clear common law authority.

This article puts practice directions and other measures in a law hierarchy (statute law, common law, delegated legislation, PDs etc); it explains how statutorily practice directions are made; and the looks media representatives carefully at to what extent PDs collectively and other types of measure bind the court. A PD, properly made, is statutory (Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (CRA 2005)) and is binding on the court; but what is their, and the other measures’, statutory source?

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