Justice For Families

Can anyone recall a recent ruling whereby a judge warned a local authority they faced commital proceedings if they continued to withold contact to a child after it had been previously directed by the judge? I need a link to the ruling if anyone can help???

All help appreciated.

Many Thanks xxx

There couldn't be commital proceedings for withholding contact if theres no penal notice attached, breach of order nine times out of ten just get told to follow the order, you should be seeking directions to force the order to be followed as per Judges instructions, then ask for a penal notice to be attached.

I am trying to look the judgement up, and recall it being released on Family Law Week, just can't find it cos I need to refer to it when I ask for the penal notice attaching. Being able to refer to high court ruling always adds weight. I need it asap if anyone can post a link for me, I'd be grateful.

Think they're going to try to shaft me in style this week, the 'R' word will need to come into effect lol

Maybe your thinking of this one?

http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed26829

or these:

P-B (Children) [2009] EWCA Civ 143 (***Best Bet***)
Judgments (05/03/2009)
Appeal by local authority against the imposition of a penal notice against their officers to enforce a contact order under s34 of the Children Act 1989. Appeal allowed to a limited extent.
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed33153


Burgess v Stokes [2009] EWCA Civ 548
Judgments (19/06/2009)
Appeal by mother against committal order arising from contact proceedings. Appeal allowed.
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed36496


V (Children) [2008] EWCA Civ 635
Judgments (15/06/2008)
Application for permission to appeal, with appeal to follow, by mother against committal order arising from breach of contact with the children’s paternal grandparents and the underlying contact order. Application and appeal allowed.
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed24245

S (A Child) [2007] EWCA Civ 267
Judgments (31/03/2007)
Appeal by father against an order that provided for contact between the maternal grandmother and his child, the mother having died soon after the child's birth. Appeal dismissed
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed2311


H (A Child) [2006] EWCA Civ 1163
Judgments (29/08/2006)
This is an application for permission to appeal the judge's decision not to impose a committal order on the mother because she was not complying with an order for contact. The application was refused.
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed1862


M (Children) [2005] EWCA Civ 615
Judgments (30/05/2005)
Appeal by father against commital order in contact case
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed395

Andrew wrote:or these:

P-B (Children) [2009] EWCA Civ 143 (***Best Bet***)
Judgments (05/03/2009)
Appeal by local authority against the imposition of a penal notice against their officers to enforce a contact order under s34 of the Children Act 1989. Appeal allowed to a limited extent.
http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed33153

Thank you, this is the one I was trying to find Andrew.

On 10th July the LA were directed to faciliate contact every 3 weeks, and that if they wanted a S.34(4) the judge told them they have to file an application and and can't just expect him to grant one without the application being filed to court. The LA cite that they wish to 'Remove Their Duty'. A S.34(4) is a 'No Contact Order' which would effectively mean I would NOT be permitted contact with my son. No authority can remove it's duty of care once they have a S.31 in place!

The LA did not faciliate contact until 4th September, which went very well and nothing since. I have emailed the DSM and LA Legal to remind them of their statutory duty to promote contact, yet the DSM tries to say they do not have a duty etc etc. However as we're in court tomorrow they have now begun rushing around to arrange a contact for next Wednesday (as they have also been rushing around to get my son into education, albeit part-time so they can say contact should not disrupt his education). The DSM refuses to make up the contact's which have not been facilitated, grrrrrrr

Isn't it amazing how authorities rush around, trying to make themselves look reasonable when a court hearing is looming?? Jeez these people are so transparent, I wish the judiciary would take a firmer stance with them because that is what is lacking. This is children's lives they are damaging!!!

I am sure the other judgements will also come in handy too Andrew.

Thanks again, much appreciated.