The latest issue,  1 FCR 3, is now live for subscribers to Family Court Reports. The following cases are included:
Enforcement – Financial remedies – Trustees – Without notice applications – Joinder – Freezing orders – Actual dissipation in past established risk of future dissipation – Asset disclosure – Penal notice naming individual directors of corporate entities – Service via judicial authorities.
Care proceedings – Final order – Lack of clear care plan – All parties seeking adjournment – Refused by judge – Final orders made although all parties seeking some form of interim order on basis that further information needed – Whether court should have waited for further information to become available – Whether final orders appropriate where ultimate long-term plan for children unknown – Importance of court resolving outstanding issues – Whether interim care order justified.
Enforcement – Committal proceedings – Legal representation – Legal aid – Non-means-tested legal aid in relation to committal proceedings – Obligation on court to ensure that available to respondents to committal proceedings – Potential for procedural irregularity if respondent not represented – Serious concerns about legal representation obtained – Explanation from firm required – No permission needed to appeal ending suspension of committal order.
Financial remedies – Availability of asset – Declaration of beneficial ownership – Additional avoidance of disposition order under s 37 MCA 1973 – No formal application for s 37 order – Not raised as issue during trial – Whether serious procedural irregularity – Whether resulted in unjust decision – Whether jurisdiction to grant s 37 order in any event – Whether s 37 order undermined lump sum order.
Care proceedings – Designated local authority – No ordinary residence – Principles to be applied – Point at which threshold passed less relevant where there were longstanding concerns about a parent leading an itinerant lifestyle – Ultimate trigger for issuing care proceedings then key – Greenwich principles only relevant in a comparable case – Undesirability of such disputes.