header-logo header-logo

Family proceedings—Orders in family proceedings—Care order

10 May 2013
Issue: 7559 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

X County Council v a mother and others [2013] EWHC 953 (Fam)

Family Division, Baker J, 25 Apr 2013

The Family Division has held that it is not in the interests of two young children the subject of interim care orders to be subjected to genetic screening for Huntingdon’s Disease (HD).

David Reynolds for the authority. Caroline Baker for the mother. Sally Barnett for the father. Christopher Watson for the children’s guardian.

The application before the court concerned two young boys, aged three and one. Their family was referred to social services in January 2012. Their father admitted having been violent to the mother. He also stated that his mother and brother suffered from Huntingdon’s Disease (HD), a hereditary disorder of the central nervous system caused by a defective gene on chromosome IV. The symptoms usually arose between the ages of 30 and 50, though they could do so earlier. The extent of the symptoms varied from person to person. In the later states of the disease the physical and mental disabilities

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

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll