LexisLibrary and LexisPSL
Sign up for a free trial today and get full access for a weekTrial
(Family Division; Coleridge J; 10 April 2006)
The judge should not have made a s 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 (the 1989 Act) order of his own motion. It was inappropriate to employ s 91(14) of the 1989 Act when proceedings were ongoing and an application under s 91(14) of the 1989 Act had to be issued in advance and supported by evidence. This was not a case involving urgent or exceptional circumstances and the court should not have ignored the usual procedural steps of an application on notice supported by evidence. Nor was this a case in which the father had made repeated unreasonable applications to the court or where the father's conduct suggested that he was bringing proceedings in an abusive way or would threaten to do so in future.
Covers the law, practice and procedure in respect of FGM and also includes wider contextual...