K (A Child), Re [2001] EWCA Civ 1893 (7 November 2001)

K (A Child), Re [2001] EWCA Civ 1893 (7 November 2001)

The applications were dismissed because the mother had not engaged with contact, there was no basis to discharge the care order, the child's welfare required non-disclosure of his address, and the section 91(14) restriction was justified by the history of disruptive and unmeritorious litigation. No human rights breaches were established.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 1893
Parties
Applicant/mother: Mrs F; Respondent/local Authority: Barnet Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Orders of Family Division Judges
Outcome
Applications dismissed; permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Contact With Child, Disclosure of Child's Address, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Human Rights (articles 3, 5, 6, 8, 14 Echr)
Family Law Child Law Care Orders Contact With Child Disclosure of Child's Address Section 91(14) Children Act 1989 Human Rights (articles 3, 5, 6, 8, 14 Echr)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs F

Applicant/mother

Barnet Borough Council

Respondent/local Authority

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Orders of Family Division Judges

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the care order should be discharged
  2. 2 Whether contact arrangements should be varied
  3. 3 Whether the address of the child should be disclosed to the mother

Ratio Decidendi

The applications were dismissed because the mother had not engaged with contact, there was no basis to discharge the care order, the child's welfare required non-disclosure of his address, and the section 91(14) restriction was justified by the history of disruptive and unmeritorious litigation. No human rights breaches were established.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed; permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Refusal to discharge care order upheld
  • Refusal to vary contact order upheld