Family - Children

Andrew is a family law specialist, with a particular interest in care proceedings and matrimonial finance. Andrew regularly appears in both the County Court and High Court, and also has significant experience in dealing with Emergency Orders and injunctions at Magistrate Court level. His practice is split between representing local authorities, parents and extended family members as well as children (by their guardians or directly) in public law matters.

Andrew has a particular interest in cases involving non-accidental injuries with numerous perpetrators and the involvement of significant medical evidence. He regularly represents local authorities and parents in a wide range of applications pursuant to the Adoption Act 2002 including those involving challenges to Placement Orders and Adoption.

In private law, Andrew has experience of dealing with relocation cases as well as those involving BIIR legislation (including Polish and Romanian nationals). He represents and advises on cases involving Jersey and Guernsey law, particularly with regard to the removal of children from those jurisdictions to the UK (or vice versa).

Andrew is accredited by the Bar Council to undertake direct public access work and has acted in cases involving both public and private children law as well as matrimonial finance.

Cases

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v Watson & Haigh [2011] EWHC B15 (Fam): Representing a local authority where a litigant in person was committed to prison (by the President of the Family Division) for breaching an Order in family proceedings.

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v Watson [2011] EWHC 2376 (Fam): A subsequent application to purge contempt following the imposition of a period of imprisonment upon a litigant in person.

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v Haigh, Tune and X [2011] EWHC 2412 (Fam): Representing a local authority in a case described by the President of the Family Division as ‘unprecedented’ and a ‘landmark decision’ which led to the disclosure of the names of the parents of child, ‘X’ within proceedings, in order to safeguard child ‘X’ and protect her anonymity. The Local Authority argued that the identification of the parents was vital to negate the inaccurate assertions being made by the mother of the father (who cared for child ‘X’) being a paedophile. The President agreed. (Led by Anthony Hayden QC in part).

SCC v M & M (2013) [Unreported]: Representing an Aunt and Uncle in proceedings where a local authority sought Care Orders for long-term foster care/adoption in respect of two children of Slovak/Roma Gypsy heritage. The court determined that the authority and guardian had failed to fully consider and assess the ability of the Aunt and Uncle to provide such care, and Special Guardianship Orders were eventually granted in their favour.

RMBC v K & K (2013) [Unreported]: Representing local authority in seeking a care order for a Polish child with Down’s Syndrome. Issues of social worker/expert’s ability to communicate with the child and her views being properly and fully presented to the court. Final Care Orders subsequently granted.

SCC v S & M (2014) [Unreported]: Representing a local authority in which significant findings were sought (and subsequently made) in respect of non-accidental injuries to two young children. Initially the local authority did not seek any restrictive orders but pursued the matter on the basis of inconclusive medical evidence relating to fractures. All findings subsequently made by the court.

Public Access

Andrew is accredited to receive instructions directly from members of the public through the Public Access Scheme.

Click here to view our Public Access pages and details of the process for instructing public access accredited barristers.