Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568

May 19, 2020, 13:36 PM
Child arrangements order — Father applied for variation – Judge refused application – Father appealed
The Court of Appeal allowed the father’s appeal and remitted the case back to the Family Division, holding that the balancing exercise performed by the judge had been flawed.
Slug :
Meta Title : Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568
Meta Keywords : Child arrangements order — Father applied for variation – Judge refused application – Father appealed
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 18, 2020, 23:00 PM
Article ID :

(Court of Appeal, McCombe, King and Peter Jackson LJJ, 29 April 2020)

Child arrangements order — Father applied for variation – Judge refused application – Father appealed

The Court of Appeal allowed the father’s appeal and remitted the case back to the Family Division, holding that the balancing exercise performed by the judge had been flawed.


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.

 


Neutral Citation Number: [2020] EWCA Civ 568

Case No: B4/2020/0318

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE CENTRAL FAMILY COURT
HHJ Meston QC

ZC19P00137

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 29 April 2020

Before :

LORD JUSTICE McCOMBE
LADY JUSTICE KING and

LORD JUSTICE PETER JACKSON

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

Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult)

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

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

Will Tyler QC and Kate Grieve (instructed by Peacock & Co Solicitors) appeared pro bono for the Appellant
Portia O’Connor (Pegasus Legal LDP) appeared for the Respondent

Hearing date : 25 March 2020

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

Approved Judgment

Covid-19 Protocol: This judgment was handed down remotely by circulation to the parties’ representatives by email, release to BAILII and publication on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website. The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be at 10:30am on Wednesday, 29 April 2020.

Judgment: Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568

 

 

Categories :
  • Child Arrangements Order
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from