Articles

Court of Appeal judgment overturning a judgment which had found that a wife had acquired a domicile of choice in England.

Unsuccessful appeal to the High Court by a mother against a decision which transferred the residence of C to her father.

Joshua Swirsky considers The Public Guardian’s Severance Applications [2017] EWCOP 10 in which District Judge Eldergill gave guidance following 17 applications by the Public Guardian for LPAs to be severed.

Jonathan Cowen considers the decision of the Administrative Court in R(Liverpool City Council and others) v The Secretary of State for Health [2017] EWHC 986 (Admin) in which four local authorities challenged the sufficiency of funding for the deprivation of liberty regime.

If the young person wishes to challenge the age assessment he has to then obtain legal advice and, if appropriate, see an interim injunction. Sometimes the interim relief is applied for after the young person has been dispersed.

The 2 applicants in these cases that were heard together were from Afghanistan and Vietnam respectively. There was nothing remarkable about the facts of either case. Both raised factual issues that are to be tried by the Upper Tribunal, however, Popplewell J ordered that a ‘rolled up’ hearing to consider the challenge to LBC’s practice.

Hilton Harrop-Griffiths considers the decision of the Administrative Court in R (S) v Croydon LBC [2017] EWHC 265 and the duty on local authorities to accommodate a young person pending the determination of an age assessment.

Jonathan Pennington Legh looks at the problems that generally arise for the home owner in relation to mortgages and leases.

On 26 January 2017, the Court of Appeal handed down its decision in London Borough of Hackney v Williams and anor [2017] EWCA Civ 26, departing from a long chain of Family Court judgments highlighting the necessity for local authorities to obtain the informed consent of parents prior to accommodating children under section 20.

In January 2017, the High Court handed down judgment in AP (by his litigation friend, BA) v Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council [2017] EWHC 65 (QB), concerning the preliminary issue of limitation in Human Rights Act claims.

Sarah Salmon considers the Supreme Court judgment in N v A Clinical Commissioning Group and others [2017] UKSC 22; [2017] 2 WLR 1011, a case described from the outset to be about the “jurisdiction” of the Court of Protection. It was, in fact, as Lady Hale noted, unfortunate that the case had been put this way: it was about the role of the Court of Protection and the approach that should be taken in light of its limited powers.