header-logo header-logo

Court rebukes family judges

30 March 2007
Issue: 7266 / Categories: Legal News , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Appeal court judges have delivered a stinging rebuke of a series of administrative and judicial errors in the child custody case Hammerton v Hammerton, where the father was sent to prison for three months.

The trial judge, Mr Justice Collins, was wrong to conduct joint proceedings for contact and committal, and this led to “inescapable errors in procedure” that deprived Mr Hammerton of the protection to which he was entitled, Lord Justice Moses said in his judgment.

Mr Hammerton, who was unrepresented, had applied for contact with two of his five children, while Mrs Hammerton had applied for her ex-husband’s committal to prison for breach of previous court orders. Collins J heard both applications together.

Moses LJ said the court below breached Mr Hammerton’s right to a fair trial and that the court should have inquired into the reasons why the father was unrepresented, and granted an adjournment while this could be resolved.
“The important rights en-shrined in Art 6 [of the European Convention on Human Rights] must not be sacrificed in the interests of time and costs,” he added.

Lord Justice Wall, who

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll