header-logo header-logo

05 February 2016 / David Burrows
Issue: 7685 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Coming of age

nlj_7685_burrows

David Burrows analyses the court’s approach to the autonomy of the mature child

The case of Re C (Older Children: Relocation) (also H v C and another) [2015] EWCA Civ 1298, [2016] All ER (D) 11 (Jan), recalls the extent to which the courts must have regard to the age and understanding of a child involved in court proceedings when the child’s views are in issue. It is a reminder of the autonomy to which mature children are entitled in family courts. The case concerned relocation of brothers aged 17 (E) and 15 (J); but its subject has wider application going to questions of confidentiality for a mature child and to mediation (urged strongly in this case). Alongside these factors is the long-awaited outcome of the decisions of Family Procedure Rules Committee and its recommendations for rule changes for evidence from children (the consultation concluded in October 2015).

The Children Act 1989 (CA 1989), s 105(1) defines a “child” as a person under 18; but as Re C emphasises “child” has a variety of meanings

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll