Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
The need for proportionality and the ‘Covid impact’
Simon Wilkinson, Parklane PlowdenThe Covid-19 pandemic has infiltrated every aspect of our lives. Within the courts and tribunals service there has been a plethora of guidance since March 2020 which...
Local authority input into private law proceedings, part II
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingsLucy Logan Green, Barrister, 4 Paper BuildingThis article considers the interplay between private and public law proceedings, focusing on the law relating...
Time for change (II)
Lisa Parkinson, Family mediation trainer, co-founder and a Vice-President of the Family Mediators AssociationThe family law community needs to respond to the urgent call for change from the...
How Can I Wed Thee? – Let Me Change the Ways: the Law Commission’s Consultation Paper on ‘Weddings’ Law (2020)
Professor Chris Barton, A Vice-President of the Family Mediators Association, Academic Door Tenant, Regent Chambers, Stoke-on-TrentThis article considers the Paper's 91 Consultation Questions...
Consultation on the proposed transfer of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of costs to the Legal Aid Agency
The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on the proposed transfer from Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to the Legal Aid Agency of the assessment of all civil legal aid bills of...
View all articles
Authors

Re A and B (Children) [2013] EWHC 2305 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 20:05 PM
Contact – Enforcement – Parents of two children in same-sex relationships – Women not complying with contact order – Whether the children were suffering emotional harm – Whether the contact order should be enforced or varied/discharged
The proceedings relating to enforcement or variation of contact arrangements were adjourned for an expert psychological assessment of the two children to be carried out to assess whether the children were suffering emotional harm.
Slug : re-a-and-b-children-2013-ewhc-2305-fam
Meta Title : Re A and B (Children) [2013] EWHC 2305 (Fam)
Meta Keywords : Contact – Enforcement – Parents of two children in same-sex relationships – Women not complying with contact order – Whether the children were suffering emotional harm
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 4, 2014, 05:46 AM
Article ID : 107641
(Family Division, Cobb J, 31 July 2013)

[The judicially approved judgment and accompanying headnote has now published in Family Law Reports [2015] 2 FLR 883]


Contact – Enforcement – Parents of two children in same-sex relationships – Women not complying with contact order – Whether the children were suffering emotional harm – Whether the contact order should be enforced or varied/discharged

The full judgment is attached below

The proceedings relating to enforcement or variation of contact arrangements were adjourned for an expert psychological assessment of the two children to be carried out to assess whether the children were suffering emotional harm.

The biological parents of the two children, aged 12 and 8, were both in same-sex relationships. The children lived with the women and an order was in place providing for contact with the men ( MA v RS [2012] FLR 1056; Re P and L (Contact) [2012] 1 FLR 1068).

The men applied for the committal of the women for 13 breaches of the contact order and enforcement of the order and/or residence orders. The women sought a variation or discharge of the contact order.

The judge found that the issues of contact and enforcement could not be looked at in a vacuum. The contextual picture and the history were important. There was evidence of outward signs of emotional harm from the children and the mother had mental health issues.

There were reasonable grounds for believing that the children were suffering significant harm to the extent that local authority intervention might well be required. In order to reach a welfare-based conclusion the court required further expert evidence on the psychological effects on the children of the options available. An urgent assessment of the general well-being of the children was ordered in order to advise the court on whether the children were currently suffering emotional harm, and if so, in what ways they were being harmed. In addition the report would assess whether that harm was significant, and the causes of any emotional harm and the implications for the children of removal from the care of the women to the care of the men or foster care.

The applications for committal and enforcement were dismissed.


The fully referenced, judicially approved judgment and headnote will appear in a forthcoming issue of Family Law Reports. A detailed summary and analysis of the case will appear in Family Law.

Neutral Citation Number: [2013] EWHC 2305 (Fam)

Case No: FD08P01237

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 31/07/2013

Before :
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE COBB

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

F1 AND F2
Applicants

- and –

M1 and M2
1st & 2nd Respondents

-and-

A and B
(by their Guardian)
3rd & 4th Respondents

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Robin Tolson QC (instructed directly under the Bar Council Public Access Rules) for the Applicants
Paul Storey QC (instructed by Baxter Harries) for the First and Second Respondents
Maggie Jones (instructed by Bindmans) for the Third and Fourth Respondents (children)

Hearing dates: 8-12, and 31 July 2013

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Judgment

This judgment was handed down in private on 31 July 2013, and published in a redacted form (removing identifying features of the family) on 24 October 2014 together with
[2013] EWHC 4150 (Fam)
[2014] EWHC 818 (Fam) .

The judgment is being distributed on the strict understanding that in any report no person other than the advocates or the solicitors instructing them (and other persons identified by name in the judgment itself) may be identified by name or location and that in particular the anonymity of the children and the adult members of their family must be strictly preserved.

Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Private Law Children
Tags :
FLR
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from