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
One in four family lawyers contemplates leaving the profession, Resolution reveals
A quarter of family justice professionals are on the verge of quitting the profession as the toll of lockdown on their mental health becomes clear, the family law group Resolution revealed today,...
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
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...
Eight things you need to know: Personal Injury damages in divorce cases
The “pre-acquired” or “non-matrimonial” argument is one which has taken up much commentary in family law circles over recent years.  However, the conundrum can be even...
Misogyny as a hate crime – what it means and why it’s needed
In recent weeks, the government announced that it will instruct all police forces across the UK to start recording crimes motivated by sex or gender on an experimental basis- effectively making...
View all articles
Authors

CONTACT: Re C [2008] EWCA Civ 551

Sep 29, 2018, 17:28 PM
Slug : re-c-2008-ewca-civ-551
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 30, 2008, 07:28 AM
Article ID : 86703

(Court of Appeal; Ward LJ; 30 April 2008)

Refusing leave to appeal the judge described a tragic, bordering on scandalous, state of affairs, in which the behaviour of mother in poisoning the child against the father had led to the child refusing to have any further contact with the father. Although there was no justification for the child's or the mother's stance towards the father, the father had been right to concede that no order for contact should be made. A copy of the judgment was to be sent to the child's solicitor with a direction that the solicitor explain to the child that father had been concerned enough for the child to bring the case, emphasising that no blame attached to him for the breakdown of contact. The solicitor was to report directly to the judge the consequences of further discussion with the child. It was a public scandal that this had gone so badly wrong.

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