header-logo header-logo

27 November 2008
Issue: 7347 / Categories: Case law , Child law , Law digest , Family , In Court
printer mail-detail

Family law

Re F-H (children) (fact-finding hearing) [2008] EWCA Civ 1249, [2008] All ER (D) 150 (Nov)

In family proceedings, the court has a discretion whether to hear evidence in relation to disputed matters of fact with a view to determining them.

Where a judge is considering, whether to abort a pre-arranged fact-finding hearing, he should ask whether any fresh, or freshly discovered, circumstances should lead him to depart from the earlier decision and should take account of the costs already incurred and the degree to which a refusal at that stage to conduct the hearing would waste them, together with any special features present in the case.

The fact that certain material need not be considered before a conclusion is reached that the court has power to make a care order does not support a conclusion that it does not need to be considered before deciding whether the optimum outcome for the children is to make such an order.

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