header-logo header-logo

Human rights

10 February 2011
Issue: 7452 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 4, [2011] All ER (D) 02 (Feb)

When considering the removal of the parent of a British child from the UK, in making the proportionality assessment under Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the best interests of the child had to be a primary consideration. That meant that they had to be considered first. They could, of course, be outweighed by the cumulative effect of other considerations. The “best interests of the child” broadly meant the well-being of the child. Specifically, it involved asking whether it was reasonable to expect the child to live in another country.

Relevant to that would be the level of the child’s integration in the UK and the length of absence from the other country; where and with whom the child was to live and the arrangements for looking after the child in the other country; and the strength of the child’s relationships with parents or other family members which would be severed if the child had to

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll