Q v Q, Re B (A Child), Re C (A Child) [2014] EWFC 31

This was a combined judgment on three cases. Lucy acted for the Mothers in each of Re B and Re C which were two unrelated sets of private law Children Act proceedings in which the mothers each made an allegation of rape against the relevant father, who were in both cases unable to obtain legal representation as a result of LASPO 2012.

Following judgment in January 2014 (see D v K and B (a child) [2014] EWHC 700 (Fam) (27 January 2014)) the funding issues had not been resolved and the matter went before the President. Although funding had been granted to the Father in Re B by the time of the hearing (following the issue of JR proceedings against the LAA), the father in Re C remained in person. The President issued a combined judgment dealing with the court’s duty to ensure proceedings were article 6 compliant, which meant that if all else failed and there would otherwise be an article 6 breach HMCTS would have to pay for representation to comply with its statutory duties under s31G(6) Matrimonial & Family Proceedings Act 1984 as amended by the Crime & Courts Act 2013 and the Human Rights Act 1998.