header-logo header-logo

18 October 2013 / David Burrows
Issue: 7580 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Taking care

istock_000004854491medium

David Burrows reviews the bases for appeal in care proceedings

The Supreme Court has recently looked at the bases for considering whether an appeal should be allowed in care proceedings. In so doing they have looked at the meaning of “wrong” where a decision may be said to be “more than to exercise a discretion”; and at the extent to which an appellate court should reconsider the decision below where it engages an issue concerning the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention), in this case Art 8 (right to respect for family and private life).

The basis on which an appeal is allowed in civil proceedings is by the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR 1998) r 52.11(3): “(3) The appeal court will allow an appeal where the decision of the lower court was—(a) wrong; or (b) unjust because of a serious procedural or other irregularity in the proceedings in the lower court.

The hearing of any appeal is a review of the decision from a lower court, unless the court considers that the interests of justice require a re-hearing (CPR 1998, r 52.11(1)).

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll