N, Re (A Child)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Wilson |
| Judgment Date | 24 June 2008 |
| Neutral Citation | [2008] EWCA Civ 827 |
| Docket Number | Case No: B4/2008/0509 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Date | 24 June 2008 |
[2008] EWCA Civ 827
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM BRISTOL COUNTY COURT
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE BARCLAY)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
LORD JUSTICE WILSON
Case No: B4/2008/0509
(LOWER COURT No: GL06P01876)
THE APPLICANT “MOTHER” DID NOT ATTEND AND WAS NOT REPRESENTED.
THE RESPONDENT “FATHER” AND RESPONDENT “CHILDREN” BY THEIR GUARDIAN DID NOT ATTEND AND WERE NOT REPRESENTED.
A mother, acting in person, has filed Notice of Appeal against orders and directions made by His Honour Judge Barclay in the Bristol County Court on 13 February 2008. This matter was listed to start at 10.30 am today and I speak at 10.31 am and the mother is not in court to present her application for permission.
Her absence comes as no surprise. Yesterday she communicated with the court in writing and sought an adjournment of today's hearing. As I recall, in her letter, not being in front of me today, she referred to the difficulties of funding a rail ticket between Bristol, where she lives, and London. I ruled that the hearing should not be adjourned. I pointed out to her, and this was duly related to her so I have been told, that, having read the papers, I had formed the view that it would be impossible for her to bring an appeal against the directions and orders made by the judge on 13 February 2008, which were, as I will explain, only of a temporary character. I indicated that it was open to her to withdraw her Notice of Appeal, in which case today's hearing would not go ahead, but that, unless she wished to do so, the hearing would go ahead. I have been told that, in response to that message, the mother, while not withdrawing her Notice of Appeal, indicated that she was not minded to attend today's hearing. In those circumstances I am clear that I should not adjourn this matter for her to attend but should, particularly in the light of the clear view which I have formed about the misconception of the proposed appeal, dispatch it today; and so I must shortly explain the background to the matter and in particular the views which I have formed.
The judge made his orders and directions of that date in the context of private law proceedings under the Children Act 1989 in respect of the mother's three children, namely M, a boy, who was born on 8 November 1995 and is thus aged 12, C, a girl, who was born on 9 December 1996 and is thus aged 11, and, as I will describe her in order to distinguish her from C, A, a girl, who was born on 27 February 2005 and is thus aged three. The mother points out that all the orders made to date in the Bristol County Court wrongly recite A's date of birth as having been 26, rather than 27, February 2005; that is an error which should be rectified.
The two older children live with their father under a residence order made by the judge on 20 December 2007. A lives with her maternal grandparents under an interim residence order made within the order under challenge dated 13 February 2008. The mother says that the father of A, who is a person other than the father of the older two children, supports her attempt to secure the restoration of A into her own home.
Thus...
To continue reading
Request your trial