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

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

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