PRR's And Court Orders Flashcards
When do PRR’s end?
When child reaches 16
Except
Still have responsibility to give guidance up to 18
Act related to PRRs
Children (S) Act 1995
S6 of 1995 Act
Take views of child into account when fulfilling PRR’s
Child’s age and maturity shouldn’t be accounted
Over 12 presumed to be of sufficient age and maturity to form a view. Younger views can also be expressed
Mother on birth or child
Married father if married to mother at time of contraception or subsequently
Unmarried father if registered as such post 2006
Second female parent who is married to mother or in CP
Who gets automatic PRR’s?
S11 orders
Any one can apply
Court has the power to make any order in relation to PRR’s as it sees fit
Common orders under s11
Removing PRR’s
Granting PRRs
Residence orders
Contact orders
Specific issue orders
S11(7) principles
Welfare of child is paramount
Child must be given opportunity to express views and account will be take in light of child’s age and maturity
Court will not make an order unless to do so will be better than making no order at all
Osborne
V
Manhattan
Child’s welfare tends to prevail over all other interests
Foster mother and mother disunite over residence. Issues of race brought up, consequences of being black raised in white family.
Looked at all relevant factors, in child’s best interests for welfare to stay with foster family.
In applying welfare principle, courts should have regard to
S11(7)(A-E)
Need to protect the child from abuse or threat of abuse which might affect child …
Shields
V
Shields
Importance of child’s views
Decision allowing a mother to take son to Australia reversed on basis that court didn’t take into account views of child
How much weight is given to views of child?
Cases
(Russell v Russell)
Child had negative feelings due to mothers influence, despite this court said should Not have contact
(Perendes v Sim)
Court chose to regard the children’s negative feelings with little sig. as had been influenced by mother
Capacity and views of child
Child over 12 presumed to be of sufficient capacity to form a view
Under 12, still given opportunity to express views
Court not obliged to do what child wants
White cross
V
White cross
Preservation of status quo
Mother failed to obtain custody of child who had lived with father since break up
Held: in the child’s best interests not to disturb current living arrangements where child was settled
Brixey
V
Lynas
Sheriff made F president parent of young child
Mother successfully appealed to CofS
Held: idea child should remain with its mother was neither a presumption or principle, but rather recognition of widely held belief based on practical experience and workings of nature
Hannah
V
Hannah
Change in position to residence orders
Not nature but welfare which is material matter
Reversed decision that child should live with mother in accordance with nature and awarded father.
No presumption children should live with mothers
