Law report: Case summaries
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The following notes of judgments were prepared by the reporters of the All England Law Reports.
Children
Re C (minors: care proceedings; ordinary residence); Fam D (Wall J) 17 December 1996.
Where a family, whose child- ren were subject to an interim care order, moved from one local authority's area to another's, thereby losing ordinary residence in the first area but without yet acquiring it in the other, the local authority to whom the interim care order had been made remained the designated authority under s 38(1) of the Children Act 1989. The fact that a local authority permitted children to remain at home under an interim care order did not constitute the provision of accommodation within s 23(1)(a) of the Act. Therefore s 105(6) did not apply and the court was free to look at the ordinary residence of the children under s 38(1) without applying the disregard under s 105(6).
Annie Bradwell (Christopher Hinde, Hackney LBC) for the first local authority; Andrew McFarlane (Jonathan Jessup, Surry CC) for the second local authority; Joan Moore (John Ford) for the mother; Lawrence Cohen, solicitor (Stuart Miller & Co) for the guardian ad litem.
Solicitor
Hurlingham Estates Ltd v Wilde & Ptrs; ChD (Lightman J) 10 December 1996.
A competent solicitor, practising in the field of conveyancing or commercial law, should be aware of the trap laid by s 34 of the Income and Taxes Act 1988, which applied where payment of a premium was required under a lease for not more than 50 years and by virtue of which the landlord was treated as becoming entitled to an amount by way of rent at the date when the lease was granted. The defendant solicitors' firm failed to advise the plaintiff that the structure of the relevant transaction would expose it to a charge to tax which could be avoided by formal alterations, and therefore was negligent.
Michael Jefferis (Ernest H. Godson & Co, Sleaford) for the plaintiff; William Stewart-Smith (Barlow Lyde & Gilbert) for the defendant.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments