D (A Child) [2006] EWCA Civ 760 (18 May 2006)

D (A Child) [2006] EWCA Civ 760 (18 May 2006)

The application for leave to intervene is refused because the child's views can be adequately presented through a CAFCASS report, and fairness and proportionality do not require elaborate argument on his behalf at this stage.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Civ 760
Parties
Subject: D (A Child); Applicant's Counsel: Mr H Setright QC and Mr M Scott-Manderson; Respondent's Counsel: Mr C Howard QC and Mr Gupta
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Application for Leave to Intervene at Appellate Stage
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Leave to Intervene, Children's Views in Proceedings, Article 13(b) Hague Convention, Wrongful Removal of Child
Family Law Child Law Leave to Intervene Children's Views in Proceedings Article 13(b) Hague Convention Wrongful Removal of Child

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D (A Child)

Subject

Mr H Setright QC and Mr M Scott-Manderson

Applicant's Counsel

Mr C Howard QC and Mr Gupta

Respondent's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Application for Leave to Intervene at Appellate Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to grant leave for the child to intervene in appellate proceedings
  2. 2 Appropriate method for the child's views to be presented to the court

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to intervene is refused because the child's views can be adequately presented through a CAFCASS report, and fairness and proportionality do not require elaborate argument on his behalf at this stage.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • CAFCASS officer to meet the child and submit a brief report on his views for the appellate hearing