Rhys Taylor, 36 Family and 30 Park PlaceJonathan Galbraith, Mathieson Consulting2020 has thus far proved to be a memorable year for all the wrong reasons, but nonetheless it remains an interesting one...
Peter Mitchell QC, 29 Bedford RowStock Options and Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) are frequently encountered by the Family Court when dividing property on divorce or dissolution of a Civil Partnership....
Re J (Care Proceedings: Past Possible Perpetrators in a New Family Unit)  UKSC 9: Bulwarks and logic – the blood which runs through the veins of law – but how much will be spilled in future?  CFLQ 215
Sep 29, 2018, 19:03 PM
Meta Title :Re J (Care Proceedings: Past Possible Perpetrators in a New Family Unit)  UKSC 9: Bulwarks and logic – the blood which runs through the veins of law – but how much will be spilled in future?
Meta Keywords :Care proceedings, threshold, likely harm, possible perpetrators, relevant facts
Canonical URL :
Trending Article :
Prioritise In Trending Articles :
Jun 21, 2013, 10:35 AM
Article ID :104847
Keywords: Care proceedings - threshold - likely harm - possible perpetrators - relevant facts
The Supreme Court has ruled, with regard to interpretation of section 31(2)(a) of the Children Act 1989, that a person's consignment to a pool of possible perpetrators of harm to a child cannot alone found a conclusion that another child ‘is likely to suffer significant harm' at the hands of that person, although in an appropriate case the fact of possible perpetration may still be relevant to proof of the threshold when taken together with other relevant facts. This commentary examines critically the court's reasoning and the decision's implications. It is argued that much of the reasoning is unconvincing and the implications of the decision very worrying.