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
CB v EB [2020] EWFC 72
(Family Court, Mostyn J, 16 November 2020)Financial Remedies – Consent order – Application for set aside – Property values left husband with lower sums than anticipated – FPR...
No right (as yet) to be married legally in a humanist ceremony: R (on the application of Harrison and others) v Secretary of State for Justice [2020] EWHC 2096 (Admin)
Mary Welstead, CAP Fellow, Harvard Law School, Visiting Professor in Family Law, University of BuckinghamIn July 2020, six humanist couples brought an application for judicial review on the...
Controlling and coercive behaviour is gender and colour blind but how are courts meeting the challenge to protect victims
Maryam Syed, 7BRExamining the most recent caselaw in both family and criminal law jurisdictions this article discusses the prominent and still newly emerging issue of controlling and coercive domestic...
Roma families face disadvantage in child protection proceedings
Mary Marvel, Law for LifeWe have all become familiar with the discussion about structural racism in the UK, thanks to the excellent work of the Black Lives Matter movement. But it is less recognised...
The ‘Bank of Mum and Dad’ – obligations and scope for change
Helen Brander, Pump Court ChambersQuite unusually, two judgments of the High Court in 2020 have considered financial provision for adult children and when and how applications can be made. They come...
View all articles
Authors

Re E-R (Child Arrangements)(No 2) [2017] EWHC 2382 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:45 PM
Private law children – Child arrangements – Transfer of care – Whether the child arrangements order should be varied
The father’s application for a transfer of care of the child was refused and a child arrangements order was made specifying that the child would spend the minimum amount of time with the father.
Slug : re-e-r-child-arrangements-no-2-2017-ewhc-2382-fam
Meta Title : Re E-R (Child Arrangements)(No 2) [2017] EWHC 2382 (Fam)
Meta Keywords : Private law children – Child arrangements – Transfer of care – Whether the child arrangements order should be varied
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Oct 25, 2017, 05:20 AM
Article ID : 116087

(Family Division, Cobb J, 11 September 2017)

Private law children – Child arrangements – Transfer of care – Whether the child arrangements order should be varied

The father’s application for a transfer of care of the child was refused and a child arrangements order was made specifying that the child would spend the minimum amount of time with the father.



For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important Family Division, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and European courts case, subscribe to Family Law Reports.

Subscribers can log in here.

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of the Family Law Reports. Please quote: 100482. 

This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.

Case No: FD16P00555
Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 2382 (Fam)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL




Date: 11/09/2017

Before:


THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE COBB


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


Re E-R (Child Arrangements)(No.2)


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


Clare Renton (instructed by Everys) for the Applicant, Mrs H
The father and Miss B (his partner) in person on 31/8 and 1/9,
assisted by Mr. Shahriar Mazandi as their McKenzie Friend.
(The father did not attend for judgment on 11/9)
Mary Hughes (instructed by Walters & Barbury) for the child (T)


Hearing dates: 31 August & 1 September 2017


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


Judgment


Judgment: Re E-R (Child Arrangements) (No 2) [2017] EWHC 2382 (Fam).rtf
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Private Law Children
Tags :
FLR_cover
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from