Facts: 2 women were in a civil partnership and there were also 2 men involved in this case. One man helped one of the women have a child and he was given parental responsibility. The second woman was also given parental responsibility too. The men considered that the other man was a stepfather to the child
Held: A defined contact order was made in favour of the men. The court said it was most helpful to think in terms of principal and seconday parenting, rather than traditional concepts of mother, father, and primary carer
Facts: a boy had lived with his grandmother since birth. The boy's father later applied for a Shared Residence Order, which was initially granted (so the boy moved in with his father).
⇒ The boy's grandmother appealed to the Supreme Court
Held: Lord Kerr reaffirmed that the “welfare of the child is the paramount consideration”
Facts: G and her partner (a lesbian relationship) lived together for 8 years. G birthed 2 girls through an artifical insemination donor.
⇒ On separation, G's partner applied for Shared Residence Order (SRO) to get parental responsiblity
⇒ At first instance, the SRO was rejected. At the Court of Appeal G's partner was given the SRO and parental responsibility to prevent her being marginalised by G.
⇒ G's partner also applied to become the primary carer instead of G
Held: The House of Lords held that G could remain the primary carer (following an appeal from the Court of Appeal). They stated that "the welfare of the child is paramount”.
Learn how to effortlessly land vacation schemes, training contracts, and pupillages by making your law applications awesome. This eBook is constructed by lawyers and recruiters from the world's leading law firms and barristers' chambers.
✅ 60+ page eBook
✅ Research Methods, Success Secrets, Tips, Tricks, and more!
✅ Help keep Digestible Notes FREE