header-logo header-logo

24 March 2011
Issue: 7458 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Family

Re T (a child)(murdered parent: contact between child and perpetrator), [2011] All ER (D) 151 (Mar)

Pursuant to s 1(1) of the Children Act 1989, the child’s welfare had to be the court’s paramount consideration. When considering an application for contact by a parent who had been violent towards the other parent, the starting point was that there should not be any presumption that, on proof of domestic violence, the offending parent had to surmount a prima facie barrier of no contact.

As a matter of principle, neither domestic violence of itself, nor murder, could constitute a bar to contact. Murder or domestic violence were one of the factors in the difficult and delicate balancing exercise of discretion. That exercise had to begin with a welfare checklist analysis.

In cases of proved domestic violence, as in cases of other proved harm or risk of harm to the child, the court had the task of weighing in the balance the seriousness of the domestic violence, the risks involved and the impact on the child against the positive factors (if any), of contact between the parent found to have been

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll