MSD and FPD (Children) (Stranded Spouse; Wardship), Re

MSD and FPD (Children) (Stranded Spouse; Wardship), Re

Continuation of the wardship order was not justified as there was no sufficient reason to invoke the inherent jurisdiction; statutory powers under the Children Act 1989 were adequate to address the concerns raised.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Mother; Respondent: Father
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Wardship (family) / Judgment on Continuation/discharge of Wardship Order
Outcome
Wardship order discharged
Legal Topics
Wardship, Stranded Spouse, Domestic Abuse, Inherent Jurisdiction, Child Residence
Family Law Wardship Stranded Spouse Domestic Abuse Inherent Jurisdiction Child Residence

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mother

Applicant

Father

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Wardship (family) / Judgment on Continuation/discharge of Wardship Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the wardship order in respect of the children should be continued or discharged

Ratio Decidendi

Continuation of the wardship order was not justified as there was no sufficient reason to invoke the inherent jurisdiction; statutory powers under the Children Act 1989 were adequate to address the concerns raised.

Court Disposition

Wardship order discharged

Orders

  • Wardship order in respect of the children is discharged