Jake Richards, 9 Gough ChambersThis article argues that the suspension on prison visits during this period and the deficiency of measures to mitigate the impact of this on family life and to protect...
ALAN INGLIS, Barrister Coram Chambers, London and ARNOT MANDERSON, Advocates, Edinburgh
This article considers the implications of the conflicting decisions of the Court of Appeal and its Scottish equivalent on which Court had jurisdiction to consider the future of the same child, R, within the context of the same UK wide statute, the Family Law Act 1986 (FLA 1986). In B v B  EWCA Civ 681,  2 FLR 741 a Court of Appeal consisting of Wall and Arden LJJ held that the law of England and Wales applied, while in the recent case RAB v MIB  CSIH 52,  1 FLR 602, the Inner House of the Court of Session comprised of Lord Eassie, Lady Paton and Lord Mackay of Drumadoon came to the contrary conclusion. Ironically, it is a conclusion described by Wall LJ as 'virtually unarguable' at p 743, para .
To read the rest of this article, see December  Family Law journal.
To log on to Family Law Online or to request a free trial click here.