header-logo header-logo

17 February 2017 / Jonathan Herring
Issue: 7734 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Points of view

nlj_7734_herring

How can the court protect a child’s welfare when faced with clashing world views, asks Jon Herring

  • Disputes over children have to be resolved by a focus on the welfare of children, rather than the rights of adults.
  • Sometimes the opposition of a religious community to contact with a parent can mean it is in the child’s welfare for there to be no direct contact.

The legal principle was easy to state: the court must assess what order would best promote the welfare of the child. The application of the principle was not: should a child living with an ultra-orthodox Jewish mother have direct contact with the other parent who was a trans woman? Jackson J had to resolve this complex dispute in J v B (Ultra-Orthodx Judaism: Transgender) [2017] EWFC 4, [2017] All ER (D) 108 (Jan).

The facts of the case

At the heart of the case were five children with ages ranging from 12 to 2. The marriage ended in 2015 when their father (X) left the home and lived as a trans woman. The children remained with the

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