S (Children)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Wall,Lord Justice Thorpe |
| Judgment Date | 23 January 2008 |
| Neutral Citation | [2008] EWCA Civ 44 |
| Date | 23 January 2008 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Docket Number | Case No: B4/2007/2798 |
[2008] EWCA Civ 44
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM CHICHESTER COUNTY COURT
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE BARRETT QC)
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Lord Justice Thorpe and
Lord Justice Wall
Case No: B4/2007/2798
Ms Magee (instructed by Messrs Bray & Bray Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.
THE RESPONDENT DID NOT APPEAR AND WAS NOT REPRESENTED.
This is a highly unusual appeal and one which, with great respect, it seems to me, should not have reached this court or have needed to do so.
A father seeks contact with his two children, born respectively in 1999 and 2000. He is currently serving a life sentence in prison, having assaulted the children's mother's stepfather. The proceedings have been going on since 2005. In them, the father has been seeking contact with the two children. However, the proceedings have not been concluded. The father remains in prison although his tariff was relatively short, and has now been exceeded. He has been refused parole and will be not eligible to make a further application for parole, we are told, until the autumn.
I need not go through the series of directions which have been given by the court or identify the various reports which have been directed, all of which at the moment seem to be somewhat inconclusive. We get to the point on 26 November 2007, when counsel attended before the judge on the father's behalf and the judge made an order that CAFCASS was to advise and recommend as soon as practicable as to how and when and in what circumstances the applicant father was to exercise his parental responsibility, by having made available to him appropriate information about the children and whether, in view of the lapse of time since the application was issued, any other form of indirect contact may be appropriate prior to his release from custody.
The court directed in paragraph 2 of its order that the matter was to be restored on the first available date after the CAFCASS report referred to in paragraph 1 was published. However, the judge then gave permission to appeal against paragraph 2 of the order – that is. the direction that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nihal Mohammed Kamal Brake v Geoffrey William Guy
...feel if she was placed in the same position as the claimant and faced with the same publicity.” In Murray v Express Newspapers PLC [2008] EWCA Civ 44, [2009] Ch 481 at [36], this Court observed: “the question whether there is a reasonable expectation of privacy is a broad one, which takes......
-
AAA (by Her Litigation Friend BBB) v Associated Newspapers Ltd
...of privacy, the judge was entitled to take into account any relevant conduct of the mother. In Murray v Express Newspapers plc [2008] EWCA Civ 44, [2009] Ch 481 at para 37, the Court of Appeal approved the following statement: "The question whether a child in any particular circumstances h......
-
Decision Nº O/220/13 from Intellectual Property Office - (Patent decisions), 23 May 2013
...could specifying a dosage regime as part of the therapeutic use confer validity on an otherwise invalid claim.” 17 Actavis v Merck [2008] EWCA Civ 444 70 Thus, Actavis v Merck17 teaches that dosages are inventive only in unusual circumstances. The conclusion I have reached above in respect ......