Q v Q [2014] EWFC 7 (21 May 2014)

Q v Q [2014] EWFC 7 (21 May 2014)

Given the seriousness of the orders sought and the reliance of expert reports on contested factual accounts, the court cannot summarily dismiss the father's application or grant a s.91(14) order without a fair hearing. The absence of legal representation and inability to fund expert attendance creates a risk of unfairness, potentially breaching domestic and ECHR obligations. The matter must be adjourned to explore whether public funding or other means can ensure a fair trial.

Citation
[2014] EWFC 7
Parties
Applicant/father: Q; Respondent/mother: Q
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Private Law Family Proceedings (child Contact and S.91(14) Order) / Interlocutory; Application for Summary Dismissal and S.91(14) Order, Adjournment for Further Submissions
Outcome
Adjourned for short period to allow Ministry of Justice or relevant authority to intervene regarding funding; no summary dismissal or s.91(14) order made at this stage.
Legal Topics
Child Contact, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Legal Aid and Access to Justice, Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial), Article 8 ECHR (family Life), Expert Evidence, Litigants in Person
Family Law Human Rights Child Contact Section 91(14) Children Act 1989 Legal Aid and Access to Justice Article 6 ECHR (fair Trial) Article 8 ECHR (family Life) Expert Evidence +1 more

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Q

Applicant/father

Q

Respondent/mother

Procedural Posture

Private Law Family Proceedings (child Contact and S.91(14) Order) / Interlocutory; Application for Summary Dismissal and S.91(14) Order, Adjournment for Further Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to summarily dismiss the father's contact application as totally without merit
  2. 2 Whether to grant a s.91(14) order restricting further applications by the father
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings can be conducted fairly given the father's lack of legal representation and inability to fund expert attendance

Ratio Decidendi

Given the seriousness of the orders sought and the reliance of expert reports on contested factual accounts, the court cannot summarily dismiss the father's application or grant a s.91(14) order without a fair hearing. The absence of legal representation and inability to fund expert attendance creates a risk of unfairness, potentially breaching domestic and ECHR obligations. The matter must be adjourned to explore whether public funding or other means can ensure a fair trial.

Court Disposition

Adjourned for short period to allow Ministry of Justice or relevant authority to intervene regarding funding; no summary dismissal or s.91(14) order made at this stage.

Orders

  • Matter adjourned for short period for possible intervention by Ministry of Justice or Secretary of State for Justice.
  • Transcript of judgment to be prepared at public expense and translated for both parties.