header-logo header-logo

Under orders

07 October 2010 / Claire Devine
Issue: 7436 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Claire Devine expands on why s 91(14) orders should be issued sparingly

In the Court of Appeal case of Re A (Contact: Section 91(14)) [2010] 2 FLR 151, the child in question was aged four years and seven months. The child’s parents were never married but the father had parental responsibility by virtue of his name being entered on the birth certificate. The child lived with his mother but had substantial contact with the father. There were difficulties with the contact arrangements and proceedings were issued. The application to the Court of Appeal resulted from an order made in the Nottingham County Court on 28 September 2009 in which an order was made, inter alia, under the Children Act 1989, s 91(14) providing that no further applications could be made without leave in respect of the child for 18 months.

Case history

The father and the mother separated in May 2007. Initially, contact was dealt with by consent. Proceedings were, however, commenced on the father’s application in March 2008 following difficulties as to the contact

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll