Significant CCLC cases

Significant CCLC cases

2016

P v Worcestershire County Council [2016] UKUT 120 (AAC)

The case related the naming of a mainstream academy for a child with a Statement of SEN, and the First Tier Tribunal's subsequent determination that the child needed 25 hours of teaching assistant support if he attended the mainstream school proposed by the LA without taking into consideration the possible costs of this provision. The Upper Tribunal found that in not taking these costs into consideration, the First Tier Tribunal had erred in law. The appellant was represented by Kate Harvey, Head of Education Law at CCLC

Full judgment

2013

SM & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 1144 (Admin)

The Home Office policy on discretionary leave to remain, which was in force at the time the decisions in question were made, was found to be unlawful as it failed to consider the welfare and best interests of the child before deciding the period of time for which leave to remain should be granted. The High Court recognised that successive grants of short periods of leave to remain can leave children in limbo and may, therefore, be contrary to their welfare. CCLC intervened in this case.

Full judgment

HC (A Child), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2013] EWHC 982 (Admin)

The claimant challenged the position under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and its Codes of Practice of treating 17-year-olds as adults rather than children, denying them the right to contact their parents when arrested or to have an appropriate adult present when questioned by the police. The failure to treat 17-year-olds as children was held to be inconsistent with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. CCLC intervened in this case.

Full judgment

R (EAT) v LB Newham [2013] EWHC 344 (Admin)

T
he local authority in this case decided to treat the claimant’s mother as an asylum seeker and contended that it was thereby prohibited from providing support by s122 (5) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. The claimant child suffered from sickle cell anaemia. The administrative court, in allowing the claimant’s judicial review claim, held that the mother had made no claim for asylum and that there had been no reasonable grounds for believing that such a claim had been made. The case established that local authorities must not be unduly misled by the fact that the UKBA, as it often does, considers applications for leave to remain on Article 3 grounds that have not in fact been advanced by the claimant themselves. CCLC acted for the Claimant.

Full judgment

2012

Application no. 57373/ 08 by P. and S. v Poland
 
The case concerned a 14 year old girl (P) who became pregnant as a result of rape, and subsequently attempted to access an abortion.  In powerful condemnation of the treatment of both the teenager and her mother, the European Court of Human Rights found that the applicants had experienced multiple violations of their human rights under the European Convention (ECHR) and that a child victim of rape in Poland should have been provided unhindered access to abortion. Although abortion is legal in Poland for victims of sexual violence, the teenager and her mother were repeatedly denied information and services, harassed by medical staff, journalists and members of the public and criminalised.  CCLC intervened in this case.
 
Full judgment 
 
HH (Appellant) v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa (Respondent); PH (Appellant) v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa (Respondent) 
F-K (FC) (Appellant) v Polish Judicial Authority (Respondent)
On appeal from: [2011] EWHC 1145; [2012] EWHC 25 (Admin)
[2012] UKSC 25

These appeals concerned requests for extradition in the form of European Arrest Warrants (EAWs) issued, in the joined cases of HH and PH, by the Italian courts, and in the case of FK, a Polish court. The issue in all three was whether extradition would be incompatible with the rights of the Appellants’ children to respect for private and family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal in the case of FK. The appeal in respect of HH was unanimously dismissed. By a majority, the Court also dismissed PH’s appeal, with Lady Hale dissenting. The majority took the view that, in cases where the offence is serious, the public interest in extradition outweighs the interest of the children.  CCLC intervened in this case.

Full judgment

 

Coram Logo

Donate:
Donate via PayPal

Fast and secure advance payday loans online | Best SR22 Insurance Ohio for your Car here SR22 Insurance Ohio | Erotic Stories, hot tales, Adult articles, XXX Story XXX Stories Hot histories