Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
View all articles
Authors

SPECIFIC ISSUE ORDER: M v H (Educational Welfare) [2008] EWHC 324 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 16:13 PM
Slug : m-v-h-educational-welfare-2008-ewhc-324-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 21, 2008, 06:14 AM
Article ID : 85047

(Family Division; Charles J; 21 February 2008)

Under a shared residence order the child lived with the mother in Germany; the father lived in England. The English court had retained jurisdiction in respect of the child's welfare. Following the mother's baptism as a Jehovah's Witness, it became apparent that the mother did not wish to promote the child's relationship with the father. The issue arose whether the child should attend full-time education in England or Germany.

The court had to identify what was most likely, if successful, to promote the short, medium and long-term welfare of the child, and then to see if that was a realistic possibility and how it was best to be achieved. The court had to be aware that it might have to take the path that reflected the least bad solution. It was in the interests of the child that she be able to continue and build her relationship with both parents; the least bad option was to order that the child attend school in England, on the basis that there was a higher risk that the mother would not promote the child's relationship with the father if the child attended school in Germany.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from