In re L v [2014] 1 JLR_Note 10 (12 December 2013)
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Family Law / Care Order
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court determined that a care order was necessary in the best interests of the child.
Court disposition
care order granted
Orders
- care order made for the child
02
Material facts
Parties
L
Child03
Procedural history
Posture
Family Law / Care Order
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
whether a care order should be made for the child
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Children (Jersey) Law 2002
welfare of the child is paramount
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court determined that a care order was necessary in the best interests of the child.
Court disposition
care order granted
- care order made for the child
Source and reliance status
Official court record
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court record
Judgment
[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [
DONATE ] Jersey Law Reports You are here:
BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Law Reports >> In re L v [2014] 1 JLR_Note 10 (12 December 2013) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2013/JLR14N110.html Cite as: [2014] 1 JLR_Note 10 [ New search ] [ Help ] In re L v 2014 (1) JLR Note 10 (12 December 2013) Family Law-children-care order The document you wish to view is available to registered users or can be purchased as a PDF. To purchase this document in PDF format or alternatively to Register to purchase membership go to the Jersey Law website via this link: 2014 (1) JLR Note 10 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/JLR/2013/JLR14N110.html
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.