Jurisdiction

The issue of jurisdiction should be addressed at the outset of the proceedings and dealt with in a procedurally appropriate manner.

Inherent and statutory jurisdiction

Statutory jurisdiction is found in a wide range of domestic legislation including the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004), the Children Act 1989 and the Domicile and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1973 (DMPA 1973).

Most aspects of family law are governed by domestic statute and statutory instruments together with various Hague Conventions. See practice Note: Hague Conventions—toolkit for family practitioners. However, there remain cases where recourse will be made to the inherent jurisdiction. The inherent jurisdiction is not confined to the wardship jurisdiction, thus it is not necessary for a child to be a ward of court before the inherent jurisdiction may be exercised. The procedure in relation to wardship proceedings is governed by the Family Procedure Rules 2010, SI 2010/2955. In relation to children proceedings the High Court inherent jurisdiction derives from the Royal Prerogative, as parens patriae, ie to take care of those who are not able to take care of themselves.

See

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Family News

Cafcass guidance on conflicting assessments in public law cases

The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published new guidance for local authorities and Cafcass for cases where the views of the children’s guardian (and therefore their independent advice to the court) and the assessment of a local authority social worker and/or the independent reviewing officer fundamentally differ on the final care plan or interim arrangements for a child. The guidance applies to all children in care and supervision order applications under section 31 of the Children Act 1989 and deprivation of liberty applications. The guidance sets out the process that should be followed at any point during proceedings where a divergence arises and should be completed before final recommendations are submitted to court. The guidance requires that a pre-final hearing meeting be convened to identify and document the points of difference for the court. It includes suggestions for structuring the pre-final hearing meeting, a template agenda and a template for sharing the agreed rationale with the court. The guidance is not intended to be used to agree a joint position, rather to make sure that recommendations to court include a clear explanation about why the children’s guardian, the local authority social worker and/or the independent reviewing officer have reached fundamentally different positions. The explanation must set out what the points of difference are so that the judge in the case can better understand these. It remains for the court to decide what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

View Family by content type :

Popular documents