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
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
View all articles
Authors

Shared Residence

Sep 29, 2018, 17:23 PM
Slug : shared-residence
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 18, 2006, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 86321

In Re G (Residence: Same Sex Partners) [2005] 2 FLR 957, the parties had cohabited in a same-sex relationship for 8 years, during which time the respondent gave birth to two children conceived by artificial insemination by donor. Following the end of the parties' relationship, the appellant obtained leave to apply for a shared residence order in respect of the younger child. The respondent made plans towards relocating with the children and her new partner to another part of the country. She did not reveal those plans until the second day of the adjourned hearing. The judge refused the application for a joint residence order, but made a series of specific issue orders designed to ensure that the appellant retained a significant role in the lives of the children.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and granted the joint residence order saying that the appellant was entitled to succeed on one or more of the grounds of appeal. Of particular relevance was the judge's failure to give sufficient importance to the fact that the respondent's plans appeared to have been designed to marginalise the appellant from the children's lives. The biological mother then defied the orders by secretly taking the children to a new home in Cornwall. When they were found, Bracewell J granted a residence order in respect of the children to her former partner. That was confirmed in April 2006 by the Court of Appeal. Lord Justice Thorpe said that the upbringing of the children had been shared and they would not distinguish between one woman and the other on the grounds of biological relationship. See May [2006] Fam Law 408 for the full news article.

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

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