K (Arranged marriage)

K (Arranged marriage)

The court found that although threshold criteria under section 31 Children Act 1989 were met, a supervision order would not be effective or proportionate given K's age, opposition, and improved circumstances. Protective orders preventing marriage or travel were not justified as there was no significant risk from the parents, and parental responsibility sufficed to protect K.

Parties
Applicant: A Local Authority; First Respondent (mother): N; Second Respondent (father): Y; Third Respondent (child): K (by her children’s guardian); Child: K (the child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings / Final Judgment
Outcome
No order made for supervision or protective measures; application for supervision and protective orders refused.
Legal Topics
Arranged Marriage, Forced Marriage, Supervision Order, Wardship, Children Act 1989, Marriage Act 1949, Parental Responsibility, Inherent Jurisdiction, Prohibited Steps Order
Family Law Child Protection Arranged Marriage Forced Marriage Supervision Order Wardship Children Act 1989 Marriage Act 1949 +3 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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A Local Authority

Applicant

N

First Respondent (mother)

Y

Second Respondent (father)

K (by her children’s guardian)

Third Respondent (child)

K (the child)

Child

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether threshold criteria under section 31 Children Act 1989 are met
  2. 2 Whether a supervision order should be made
  3. 3 Whether protective orders preventing marriage or travel should be made under inherent jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that although threshold criteria under section 31 Children Act 1989 were met, a supervision order would not be effective or proportionate given K's age, opposition, and improved circumstances. Protective orders preventing marriage or travel were not justified as there was no significant risk from the parents, and parental responsibility sufficed to protect K.

Court Disposition

No order made for supervision or protective measures; application for supervision and protective orders refused.