Family - 2000

These cases are extracted from a very large database. The entries on that database are now being published individually to the main swarb.co.uk website in a much improved form. As cases are published here, the entry here will be replaced by a link to the same case in that improved form on swarb.co.uk. In addition the swarb.co.uk site includes very substantial numbers of cases after 2000. Please take the time to look.  

This page lists 48 cases, and was prepared on 06 June 2013. These case are being transferred one by one to the main swarb.co.uk site which presents them better, with links to full text where we have it, and much improved cross referencing.

in Re CH (family proceedings: court bundles) [2000] 2 FCR 193
2000 FD Wall J	Family, Litigation Practice	Casemap

Khreino -v- Khreino; CA 2000

A -v- A, B -v- B [2000] 1 FLR 701
2000 FD Charles J	Family	Casemap 1 Citers
	'the court is not a 'common informer'.

El Fadl -v- El Fadl; FD 2000

Smith -v- Smith [2000] 3 FCR 374
2000 FD Thorpe J	Family	1 Citers
	Ancillary relief

Practice Direction (Arresting Officer: Attendance)
19 Jan 2000 FD	Family, Contempt of Court
	The direction deals with the circumstances in which the officer who makes an arrest in family proceedings for the breach of a non-molestation or similar order should be asked to attend court personally on the hearing regarding that breach. Unless the circumstances of the arrest itself appeared to be an issue, or unless the officer could give evidence as a witness to the circumstances leading up to the arrest, the officer need not normally be called.
	Family Law Act 1996 47(7)

G -v- G [2000] EWCA Civ 3010
1 Feb 2000 CA	Family
	Link[s] omitted

Practice Direction (Family Proceedings: Court Bundles) Times, 22 March 2000; [2000] 1 WLR 737; [2000] 1 FLR 536
10 Mar 2000	Family, Litigation Practice
	There should at be lodged with the court a summary of the background to the hearing; a statement of the issue or issues to be determined; a summary of the order or directions sought by each party; a chronology; and skeleton arguments.

W -v- W (Ancillary Relief: Practice)
15 Mar 2000 FD	Family
	Where in a divorce the parties had gone through the financial dispute resolution but that had failed and the parties turned to the courts to resolve the dispute it was helpful and appropriate, particularly in high value cases, to expand on the background information to illustrate the parties respective contributions, the genesis of current resources and the standard of living during the marriage.

Samantha Griffin -v- Lawrence David Griffin [2000] EWCA Civ 119
7 Apr 2000 CA	Family, Contempt of Court, Jury
	It was not wrong to make an order suspending commitment for contempt of court provided he complied with another order which had been made without any limit of time. The power to commit remains a common law power with statutory restrictions. An order can be valid and within the judge's discretion even if it is one which should not normally be made.
	Link[s] omitted

Jones -v- Jones
11 Apr 2000 CA	Family
	A court had the power to extend a maintenance order which was limited in time, even after it had expired. It was sufficient that the application had been made before the order had expired. Conflicting series of cases should now be settled on this basis. To hold otherwise and require that the order itself must be made before the order expired would lead to injustice and uncertainty. It was necessary to show an intention to exercise the jurisdiction of the court, and that was satisfied my issuing the application.
	Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 28(1A)

Shackell -v- United Kingdom 45851/99
27 Apr 2000 ECHR	Human Rights, Family, Benefits	1 Citers
	The court held inadmissible a claim by an unmarried woman to widow's benefit. The parties having chosen not to marry, they could not complain of not having the legal benefits of a marriage. The promotion of marriage by way of limited benefits for surviving spouses could not be said to exceed the margin of appreciation afforded to the Government: "The court accepts that there may well not be an increased social acceptance of stable personal relationships outside the traditional notion of marriage. However, marriage remains an institution which is widely accepted as conferring a particular status on those who enter it."

Hannigan -v- Hannigan; CA 18-May-2000

In R H (A Minor) (Court Bundles: Disallowance of Fees)
6 Jun 2000 CA	Family, Litigation Practice, Legal Professions
	The court's practice direction on the provision of bundles and the specification of what the bundles should contain in Family Division cases, a warning to practitioners that they would have little by way of answer to a wasted costs order. The shorter the appointment the greater the need for appropriate bundles, and the judge should not be expected to have to rely upon the court papers.

In the Matter of F (Adult Patient) [2000] EWCA Civ 192
16 Jun 2000 CA	Family, Health
	F had been put into the care of the local authority having a mental diability with a capacity of an 8 year old. The authority resisted her removal from their care by her mother.
	Link[s] omitted

In Re L (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re V (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re M (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In Re H (A Child) (Contact: Domestic Violence); In re L, V, M and H (Children) [2000] Fam 260; [2000] Fam Law 615; [2000] EWCA Civ 194; [2000] 4 All ER 609; [2000] 2 FCR 404; [2000] Fam Law 603; [2001] 2 WLR 339; [2000] 2 FLR 334
21 Jun 2000 CA Butler-Sloss LJ, Thorpe LJ, Waller LJ	Family, Children	Casemap 1 Citers
	When considering contact applications after domestic violence, the approach should be child centred, and according to the criteria in the Act. The circumstances of the violence should be looked into, and the potentially damaging effect of contact with a violent parent should not be underestimated. The parent's possible contribution to the child and facing up to the reality of what had happened should be allowed for. Still domestic violence was not an absolute bar to contact. The term 'parental alienation' is unhelpful, and is better thought of as outright hostility.
	Children Act 1989
	[ Bailii ]

G -v- F (Non-Molestation Order: Jurisdiction)
22 Jun 2000 CA	Family, Magistrates	Casemap 1 Cites
	The issue of whether a respondent to a non-molestation order application was an associated person, was to be construed purposively. The system was designed to afford a swift and accessible procedure. There had been present three of the admirable Crake signposts of co-habitation, a sexual relationship, financial support, and a respondent's admissions against interest. If they had taken the co-habitation point first, the association would have become an open question.
	Family Law Act 1996

G -v- G (Financial Provision: Separation Agreement) [2004] 1 FLR 1011
28 Jun 2000 CA Thorpe LJ	Family	1 Citers
	The parties had been married before and had signed a prenuptial agreement. Held: Thorpe LJ set out the duties of a judge in ancillary relief applications: "A judge has to do fairness between the parties, having regard to all the circumstances. He must be free to include within that discretionary review the factors which compelled the wife to terminate the marriage as she did. The point was essentially taken as a defensive shield to the reliance upon the duration submission. There must surely be room for the exercise of a judicial discretion between the pole of a wife who is driven to petition by the husband's unfeeling misconduct and that of a wife who exits from a marriage capriciously and for her own advantage. It seems to me that the judge was doing no more than taking his bearings as to where he stood along that path."
	Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 25(2)(d)

Practice Direction: (Family Proceedings: Ancillary Relief Procedure)
4 Jul 2000 FD	Family
	The court gave directions as to the extension of the new ancillary relief procedures to all family courts, and clarified the duties of parties taking part in dispute resolution appointments, to make real attempts to reach settlements, and to acknowledge that no part of such procedure would later be admissible. The court also emphasised the need to comply with the pre-application protocols.

W -v- H (Family Division: without notice orders) [2001] 1 All ER 300
10 Jul 2000 FD Munby J	Family, Litigation Practice	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	Munby J considered the practice to be followed in the Family Division when injunctions are granted ex parte and without notice against third parties in ancillary relief cases. Held: The court traced the history of undertakings in damages give by litigants in the family division seeking interim injunctions. As to the Interoute case, "I am not pursuaded that Lightman J.'s approach can simply be imposed without more ado in the Family Division. The circumstances in which ex parte relief is obtained in the Family Division vary very widely. Moreover, as cases such as Khreino v Khreino (No.2) (court's power to grant injunctions) [2000] 1 FCR 80 so vividly illustrate, such relief is often granted in the Family Division in circumstances very far removed indeed from any circumstances in which ex parte relief is ever normally granted in the Chancery Division."

Nwogbe -v- Nwogbe; CA 11-Jul-2000

In Re F (Adult: Court's Jurisdiction); CA 25-Jul-2000

Dorney-Kingdom -v- Dorney-Kingdom
25 Jul 2000 CA	Children, Family, Child Support
	A court may not make an original order for child maintenance, save by consent. The practice of disguising such an order, as part of spousal maintenance, pending a determination by the Child Support Agency, was only legitimate where there was included a real element of spousal maintenance. Simply calling child maintenance spousal maintenance is not correct or legitimate.
	Child Support Act 1991 8(5)

In Re L (Minors) (Care Proceedings: Cohabiting Solicitors)
27 Jul 2000 FD	Legal Professions, Family
	Where two solicitors who cohabited appeared on either side of a case, it was appropriate, if objection was taken, for either or both to withdraw. The cohabitation could give rise to a perception of bias. The power to remove an advocate is inherent and statutory. The freedom to choose one's advocate is fundamental, and must be limited only with great care. An injection was unnecessary, and the court can remove the name from the court record. No formal or general rule can be set as to the circumstances in which such decisions may need to be made.

Binder -v- Binder [2000] EWCA Civ 412
28 Jul 2000 CA	Family
	Order to vacate family home on ancillary relief proceedings
	[ Bailii ]

Regina and Secretary of State for Home Department -v- Gavin Mellor [2000] EWHC Admin 385
31 Jul 2000 Admn	Prisons, Family, Human Rights, Health	Casemap
	[ Bailii ]

A -v- B unreported, 31 July 2000
31 Jul 2000 FD Lloyd J	Family
	Husband and wife pursued ancillary relief applications, but an issue arose as to copyright, and it was transferred to Chancery. W kept a personal diary. H read it after W said she wanted a divorce. He read passages and had extracts photocopied before returning it. He still retained two pairs of copies and a further copy of one page. W sought delivery up of the retained copies, as being made in breach of copyright and of confidence. The application was for summary judgment on the basis of affidavit evidence only. Held. They had been relevant to the matrimonial proceedings. H denied that it was confidential, and submitted that an order for delivery up requires some breach of confidence to be shown. Lloyd J said: "It seems to me that the relevance of the need to specify what the information which is confidential is and accordingly be protected may arise in relation to a situation of this kind, as it certainly does in a commercial situation. But it is relevant mainly and perhaps only, to a claim for an injunction. To order delivery up, is concerned, the court must be satisfied that the material includes something which is confidential, but it would be a defence that on the same page there is also a statement of something which is in the public domain". The pages were confidential. H submited that the confidentiality would justify an order if the material might later be put in evidence. Lloyd J declined summarily to order summary delivery up for copyright breach since "copyright is not infringed by anything done for the purposes of parliamentary or judicial proceedings". The evidence justified proceeding on the basis that when the photocopies were made W had already said that she wanted the divorce and that he foresaw that they might be useful as evidence. The judge did not decide what the true effect of section 45 was. He said: "I regard it as sufficiently well arguable that it is not limited to copies made after the issue of the appropriate originating process, and accordingly that whether a copy made before that moment is made for the purposes of proceedings which are in fact commenced thereafter is to be determined by an objective assessment, which no doubt would have regard to the evidence of the copier but would not be limited to that". On the claim in breach of confidence, Lloyd J declined to order delivery. The jurisdiction was equitable. W was required to lodge all copies which were in his custody power or possession with his solicitors subject to an undertaking that they were only used for the purposes of proceedings pending between the parties: "It seems to me that …… though the applicant is not entitled to have the documents back as of right, she is entitled to have them safeguarded and their use controlled in this way".
	Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 45(1)

W -v- Middlesborough Borough Council (Exclusion Order: Evidence)
4 Aug 2000 FD	Family
	When an application was made to exclude somebody from their home, the statement of facts in support must not only detail the factual material, but also refer to the evidence which supported, in appropriate cases, the relevant provisions under the Act. The statement must also be clear as to what was required of the respondent. It was wrong to imprison the applicant for a breach of a court order which had clearly no longer been appropriate at the time of the breach.
	Children Act 1989 - Family Proceedings Court (Children Act 1989) Rules 1991 (SI 1991/1397)

Hale -v- Tanner; CA 22-Aug-2000

Practice Direction (Family Proceedings: Human Rights)
12 Oct 2000 FD	Human Rights, Family
	Those seeking to present to the court arguments under the Human Rights Act must produce to the court full and authoritative texts of the cases they relied upon (including texts downloaded from the ECHR Internet site), and cases involving a possible application for a declaration of incompatibility should be allocated to a High Court judge. Cases involving claims arising from a judicial act should be reserved in the County Court to a circuit judge, and in the High Court to a High Court Judge.
	Human Rights Act 1998

Practice Direction (Family Proceedings Costs)
24 Oct 2000 FD	Family, Costs
	New and future practice directions as to costs under the Civil Procedure Rules should be applied as appropriate to family proceedings and proceedings in the Family Division. The significant difference remained as to systems of funding, and it remains the case that enforceable conditional fee arrangements will not apply in family cases.

White -v- White; HL 26-Oct-2000

Regina -v- Secretary of State for Health, Ex Parte Lally
26 Oct 2000 QBD	Children, Human Rights, Family
	Tight restrictions had been placed on the circumstances under which children might visit prisoners in high security hospitals who were seen to be a risk to them having been convicted of murder or similar or who were schedule 1 offenders. The restrictions were valid, since they always allowed visits where a court had ordered contact, and there was no clear line to be drawn between different classes of convicted murderers. Contact was to be assessed in accordance with the child's best interests, and breaks in contact with remoter family members such as nephews and nieces, need not be considered interference with family life.
	European Convention on Human Rights

W -v- W (Physical inter-sex) [2001] Fam 111
31 Oct 2000 FD Charles J	Family	1 Citers
	A party to a marriage had ambiguous physical characteristics. The respondent's sex at birth was uncertain, and that the parents chose to register her as a boy. As a child and a young woman she dressed as, appeared as, and acted as female. At 17, she finally ran permanently away from home and thereafter lived as a woman before gender re-assignment surgery, and had consummated the marriage as female, but was infertile. Held: In the circumstances it would be correct to find that she was female for the purposes of testing the validity of the marriage. On the true construction of the Matrimonial Causes Act, greater emphasis could be placed on gender rather than sex.
	Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

In Re S (A Child) (Ex Parte Orders); CA 02-Nov-2000

Winter -v- Winter November 10, 2000, unreported
10 Nov 2000 CA Brooke LJ	Family, Costs
	Brooke LJ said: "before the Civil Procedure Rules came into effect . . if a claimant substantially succeeded he was likely to be awarded an order for costs even though he failed on certain issues. The new Rules provide a break from that tradition and enable a court to do greater justice if a party has caused court costs to be expended on an issue on which he ultimately fails."

Levy -v- Legal Services Commission (Formerly the Legal Aid Board) [2000] EWCA Civ 285
10 Nov 2000 CA	Insolvency, Family, Legal Aid
	A costs order made in the course of family proceedings had the same protection against enforcement through insolvency proceedings as do other family orders. No provable bankruptcy debt arose because it was made under an order in family proceedings. There were no special circumstances to require the court to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction to found a bankruptcy petition on a non-provable debt. A party served with a statutory demand based upon a non-provable debt has the right to have the demand set aside, since there was no realistic prospect of a bankruptcy order following.
	Insolvency Rules 1986/1925 12.3(2)(a)
	[ Bailii ]

A -v- A (Maintenance Pending Suit: Provision for Legal Fees); FD 15-Nov-2000

Bellinger -v- Bellinger [2001] 1 FLR 389
22 Nov 2000 FD Johnson J	Family, Administrative	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	The test for what sex somebody was for the purposes of validating a marriage was the sex as decided and set out on the birth registration certificate. Though increasing recognition has been given to the complexities of gender identity over the years, this was an area which, if it was to be reformed, must be reformed by parliament and as a comprehensive whole, not piecemeal by judges. Johnson J said: "There is now a distinct possibility that were it possible to do so, examination of the brain of a living individual would reveal further indications of gender. But that is not yet possible and the practical reality is that whatever may ultimately emerge from advances in medical science, the only criteria for determining the gender of an individual remain those identified in Corbett."
	Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 11

De Montford -v- Mckenzie [2000] EWCA Civ 411
23 Nov 2000 CA	Family
	Ancillary relief
	[ Bailii ]

First National Bank Plc -v- Walker and Another; CA 23-Nov-2000

Mubarak -v- Mubarak; FD 30-Nov-2000

H, Re [2000] EWCA Civ 414
30 Nov 2000 CA	Family
	Power to attach power of arrest when claimant under 18.
	Family Law Act 1996 Part IV
	Link[s] omitted

Dharamshi -v- Dharamshi [2000] EWCA Civ 305
5 Dec 2000 CA Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Schiemann, And Lord Justice Thorpe	Family	Casemap 1 Cites
	On a divorce where there were fairly substantial sums at issue, the two parties argued for different bases for calculation of the wife's interests, either her reasonable needs according to Duxbury tables, or otherwise to reflect the particular facts. Held: The Ogden tables should not be preferred in matrimonial proceedings. In substantial asset cases two principles apply: there must be no gender discrimination in applying the statutory criteria, and equality should be departed from only with good reason. The need to articulate reasons for departing from equality would help the parties and the court to focus on the need to ensure the absence of discrimination, and the ceiling of reasonable requirements must be rejected. Appeal dismissed.
	Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 24
	[ Bailii ]

A Local Authority -v- A Mother and Child [2000] EWCA Civ 339
20 Dec 2000 CA The President. Lord Justice Laws, And Lady Justice Hale	Costs, Family, Legal Aid, Constitutional, Civil Procedure Rules	1 Cites
	A solicitor claimed the sum of £59.00 for the cost of preparing his legal aid bill for assessment. The court had disallowed the costs of an in-house costs draftsman preparing the bill. The Costs Procedure Rules would generally allow something toward such a charge. The Court of Appeal had given leave to appeal although the amount at issue in this case was less than ten pounds. Held: The Act specified what sums could be paid from the legal aid fund. The rules made under the Act specified a sum of £71.75 toward the cost. Historically the preparation of a bill is seen as part of a solicitors overheads, and thus not claimable. This changed under the Civil Procedure Rules, and the solicitor argued that the Rules over-rode the Regulations so as to remove the limitation. However there is no new additional category by which changes under the rules have become vires. The Civil Procedure Rules go through no process of democratic control. The Rules have no power to override either legislation or subordinate legislation.
	Civil Legal Aid (General) Regulations 1989 (SI 1989 No 339) 107 - Legal Aid Act 1988 6(1) - Civil Procedure Rules 2.16
	Link[s] omitted

Elliott -v- Elliott [2000] EWCA Civ 407
20 Dec 2000 CA	Family
	Ancillary relief
	[ Bailii ]

Elliott -v- Elliott [2000] EWCA Civ 407_2
20 Dec 2000 CA	Family
	Application for leave to enter fresh evidence on appeal against ancillary relief order.
	Link[s] omitted

Campbell Or Wilson -v- Wilson [2000] ScotSC 34
21 Dec 2000 ScSf Sheriff Principal B A Kerr	Family, Scotland
	Matrimonial Homes (Family Protection) (Scotland) Act 1981
	[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]