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
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
View all articles
Authors

Re X and Y [2016] EWHC 2271 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:16 PM
The President held that the English court did not have jurisdiction to make a secure accommodation order for placement of a child in Scotland.
Slug : re-x-and-y-2016-ewhc-2271-fam
Meta Title : Re X and Y [2016] EWHC 2271 (Fam)
Meta Keywords : Public law children – Secure accommodation – Jurisdiction – Placement of child in Scotland
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 21, 2016, 07:48 AM
Article ID : 114546
(Family Division, Sir James Munby, the President of the Family Division, 12 September 2016)

Public law children – Secure accommodation – Jurisdiction – Placement of child in Scotland

The President held that the English court did not have jurisdiction to make a secure accommodation order for placement of a child in Scotland.


X and Y, who were 16 and 15 respectively, were subject to care proceedings. When their behaviour deteriorated applications were made to place them in secure accommodation. No places were available in England and, therefore, the applications were for placement in Scotland. It fell to be determined whether a judge sitting in England could make an order under s 25 of the Children Act 1989 for a child to be placed in a unit in Scotland. If not, whether the court could exercise the inherent parens patriae jurisdiction of the High Court. In either case, the question arose of whether such an order could be recognised and enforced in Scotland.

The President held that a judge in England could not make an order under s 25 for the child to be placed in Scotland. However, in principle, a judge could exercise the inherent jurisdiction and order the placement of a child in secure accommodation in Scotland providing the substantive and procedural requirements of Art 5 of the European Convention were complied with.

It was clear that none of the legislative provision provided for the recognition and enforcement in Scotland of an order made by a judge sitting in England under the inherent parents patriae jurisdiction.

In the circumstances of this case, the only option was for an application to be made by the relevant local authorities to the Scottish Court of Sessions seeking to invoke the nobile officium. Following a decision, the matter could be listed again to determine what should be done in light of the Scottish court's decision.

Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWHC 2271 (Fam)
Case numbers omitted

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL

Date: 12 September 2016

Before :


SIR JAMES MUNBY
PRESIDENT OF THE FAMILY DIVISION


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


In the Matter of X (A Child)
In the Matter of Y (A Child)


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


Ms Julia Cheetham QC and Mr Michael Jones (instructed by the local authorities) for Cumbria County Council and Blackpool Borough Council
Mr Simon Rowbotham (instructed by Denby & Co) for X’s guardian
Ms Susan Grocott QC and Ms Rebecca Gregg (instructed by Gaynham King & Mellor) for X
Ms Susan Grocott QC and Ms Alison Woodward (instructed by Cooper Nimmo) for Y’s guardian


Hearing dates: 28 July, 1 September 2016


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

Re X and Y [2016] EWHC 2271 (Fam)

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