header-logo header-logo

03 February 2023
Issue: 8011 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 3 February 2023

Child

R v T [2022] EWHC 3362 (Fam), [2023] All ER (D) 56 (Jan)

The Family Division ruled on preliminary issues concerning jurisdiction, which arose in the course of the British applicant’s applications, seeking orders for the children (including A) to spend time with her, following the breakdown of her civil partnership with the respondent (the children’s gestational mother). The children (who were British, but currently lived in the UAE with the respondent) had been conceived through IVF or intrauterine insemination. The applicant contended that she was the children’s legal and psychological mother and parent and that, if the English court declined to accept jurisdiction under the Family Law Act 1986, she would have no way of having her ‘parental rights’ determined because the UAE did not recognise parental rights relating to same-sex parents and criminalised same-sex relationships. The court considered, among other things, whether the applicant was a parent within the meaning of s 42 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 and, concerning the issue of consent

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

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll