Our website is set to allow the use of cookies. For more information and to change settings click here. If you are happy with cookies please click "Continue" or simply continue browsing. Continue.

Family Law

The leading authority on all aspects of family law

Court of Protection Practice and Procedure Conference 2016

A comprehensive guide to best practice and current thinking

26 APR 2013

CONTACT: Re T (Contact: Application to Replace Indirect Contact with Supervised Contact)

(Court of Appeal, Thorpe, Rafferty, Kitchin LJJ, 16 April 2013)

The father was granted contact with his two children on a supervised basis due to concerns that if unsupervised he would remove the children to his homeland.

The father applied for a variation of the contact arrangements because the contact agency was no longer willing to facilitate contact. He also applied to change the name of the younger child. The judge reduced the arrangements to only indirect contact and refused the change of name application without providing reasons. The father appealed.

The judge was under a duty to explore every possible option for continuing supervised contact and he had failed to do so. He had also overlooked his responsibility to rule on the change of name application.

The order for supervised contact was restored and the change of name application remitted to the county court.


Family Law


"the principal (monthly) periodical dealing with contemporary issues" Sir Mark Potter P

More Info from £49.00
Available in Family Law Online

Family Court Practice 2016, The

(Red Book)

Order your copy today and get the Autumn Supplement

More Info from £465.00
Available in Family Law Online
Subscribe to our newsletters