Spotlight
Court of Protection Practice 2024
'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 articlesrss feeds
New Family Presiding Judges Appointed
The Lady Chief Justice, with the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor, has announced the appointment of two Family Presiding Judges.Mr Justice MacDonald has been appointed for a period of four years,...
Victims given greater access to justice through legal aid reform
Innocent people who have suffered miscarriages of justice, personal harm or injury are among those who will benefit from upcoming changes to legal aid means testing coming into effect this...
Obligations and responsibilities – the mosquito in the bedroom
Stephen Wildblood KC, 3PB BarristersLuke Nelson, 3PB BarristersWhatever happened to ‘obligations and responsibilities’ in s 25(2) MCA 1973?  Why is it that all of the other words in...
A rare order for a child in utero
Mary Welstead, CAP Fellow Harvard Law School; Visiting Professor in Family law University of BuckinghamIn 2023, Kettering NHS Trust applied for an anticipatory declaration for a child...
Stranded spouses: an overview
Mani Singh Basi, Barrister, 4PB, author of A Practical Guide to Stranded Spouses in Family Law ProceedingsThis article provides an overview of the issues that often arise in cases...
View all articles
Authors

Residence Applications - Does Biology Matter?

Sep 29, 2018, 16:27 PM
Title : Residence Applications - Does Biology Matter?
Slug : residence-applications-does-biology-matter
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Check Copyright Text : No
Date : Jul 18, 2006, 04:21 AM
Article ID : 85177

Sarah Clarke, Solicitor, Bindmans, London. A recent decision in the Court of Appeal, Re G (Residence: Same Sex Partners) [2006] EWCA Civ 372, has taken a fresh look at the way in which a child's natural parent should be defined and understood when considering the question of a child's residence. The court has rejected the idea that special significance should be attached to a child being brought up by the biological parent over the parent who is important to the child in the psychological sense. The appeal was against a decision of Mrs Justice Bracewell who had transferred the primary care of two girls, age 4 and 7, from the biological mother of the girls to her lesbian ex-partner. See August [2006] Fam Law 679 for the full article.

Click here if you subscribe to the Family Law journal online.

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