Phone: 0151 243 6000
Year of call: 2017Book BarristerDownload Details
Before transferring to the Bar, Natalie practised as a Family Law Solicitor, undertaking her own advocacy at all levels. During her time in practice, Natalie developed a specialism in representing parties in public law care proceedings, including representing children through her accreditation as a Children Panel member.
Natalie also has experience of being employed by a Local Authority childcare department, undertaking her own advocacy in a wide range of public and complex private law proceedings.
Natalie is highly organised and demonstrates a committed approach to her case preparation. She is friendly and approachable, ensuring a strong rapport with both lay and professional clients.
Family - Children
Natalie accepts instructions from all parties in all children law matters, representing local authorities, parents, relatives, interveners and children.
Natalie has experience in representing all parties in public law proceedings involving wide ranging issues including:
- Domestic violence
- Non-accidental injuries
- Drug/alcohol abuse
- Sexual abuse.
Natalie also has experience in complex cases involving issues of radicalisation, forced marriage and female genital mutilation.
Natalie has regularly acted for the most vulnerable clients including receiving instructions from the Official Solicitor.
Natalie represents all parties in Section 8 Children Act applications including Child Arrangements Orders, Specific Issue Orders and Prohibited Steps Orders, including complex proceedings involving allegations of physical and sexual abuse and implacable hostility, often when a 16.4 Guardian has been appointed.
Natalie also represents parties in Family Law Act proceedings including application for ex-parte Non-Molestation Orders and Occupation Orders, through to Finding of Fact Hearings.
A Local Authority v Z (2018)
Represented the father in a 7 day Final Hearing where the care plan for the child was for Care and Placement Orders to be made. Successfully argued for further assessment of the grandparents, and furthermore, against the parents being ruled out at an interim stage on a North Yorkshire basis, thus enabling the opportunity for further assessment and consideration of rehabilitation of the child to the parents’ care.
A Local Authority v B (2018)
Represented a sibling group of four children via their Guardian whereby it was proposed by the Local Authority that the youngest child be adopted, thus effecting a permanent separation from both his parents and siblings. Persuaded the court that further assessment of the mother was required in respect of her ability to care for the youngest child, as opposed to all four. The care plan is now one of rehabilitation following a successful ISW report.
A Local Authority v B (2018)
Represented the maternal grandmother, an Intervenor, in a Finding of Fact hearing, listed to establish the perpetrator of serious burn injuries to a two-year-old child. Resulted in no findings of perpetration being made against the grandmother.
A Local Authority v A (2017)
Represented a Local Authority in obtaining a Forced Marriage Protection Order against a father who had taken his 15-year-old daughter to the Yemen in order for her to be married. Secured the child’s return to the UK. A FMPO was made until the child reached 18.
A Local Authority v B (2016)
Instructed by a Guardian to represent two children who had been found to have been victims of sexual abuse by their parents in earlier care proceedings, resulting in Care and Placement Orders being made. As a result of the children’s extensive emotional and behavioural needs, and subsequent failed adoption, the Local Authority sought to revoke the Placement Order. The parents made an application for contact with the children. Natalie advocated strongly on behalf of the children, to ensure that the Court made an order pursuant to s34(4) order for no contact between the parents and children, as well an order to change of the children’s middle name and surname, in order to protect their identity.
A Local Authority v M (2016)
Instructed by the mother in highly sensitive wardship proceedings before Ms Justice Russell in the Royal Courts of Justice regarding assertions that the parents were attempting to take the children to Syria in order to be radicalised. Successfully argued that the children should remain placed with the parents, and following intricate and forensic examination of complex and voluminous disclosure, the Local Authority agreed to withdraw their application which resulted in the children remaining in the care of their parents with no order.
W v W (2016)
Secured a change of residence from mother to father in circumstances of implacable hostility, repeated breached orders and protracted litigation.
A Local Authority v W (2016)
Represented a mother in proceedings whereby the children were exposed to appalling home conditions, resulting in the children being removed by the Police who had exercised their powers of protection. Successfully argued for the rehabilitation of the children to the mother at the conclusion of proceedings, assisting in preparation of robust rehabilitation and support plan pursuant to a Supervision Order.
A Local Authority v E (2015)
Represented the respondent father, a Doctor, in proceedings involving purported Non-Accidental injuries to young son, who had suffered a skull fracture. Successfully argued against the removal of the child to foster care, securing a placement with family members and obtained a high level of daily contact pending further investigations. A successful application was made for three medical experts, who concluded that, in accordance with the instruction of the parents, the injury was accidental, and accordingly the application of the Local Authority was withdrawn, the respondents exonerated and the child returned to the parents’ care with no order.
A Local Authority v L (2015)
Represented a father who had extensive caring responsibilities for his autistic son. Following an emotional breakdown resulting in hospitalisation, the son was removed to foster care. Following the father’s discharge from hospital, successfully argued against the continued separation of father and son, and secured rehabilitation of child to his father’s care on an interim basis. Proceedings concluded with a Supervision Order, ensuring appropriate level of support provided by the Local Authority and other agencies and professionals.Book BarristerBack to top