The article is written by Naomi Wiseman and James Holmes of the Garden Court Family Team.
The article is on two recent judgments, one by the President in Re A (A Child: Female Genital Mutilation: Asylum) [2019] EWHC 2475 (Fam) and Cobb J in Re X (FGMPO No 2) [2019] EWHC 1990 (Fam).
In the case of Re A (A Child: Female Genital Mutilation: Asylum [2019] EWHC 2475 the President of the Family Division held that there is no jurisdiction for a family court to make a FGM protection order against the Secretary of State for the Home Department to control the exercise of her jurisdiction with respect to matters of immigration and asylum. The extent of the family court's jurisdiction in such matters is to invite the Secretary of State and/or the relevant tribunals to consider any determinations made by the court in proceedings under the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003. James Holmes and Naomi Wiseman of the Garden Court Family Law Team represented the Local Authority. Kathryn Cronin and Artis Kakonge of the Garden Court Family Law Team represented the child. The Secretary of State has sought permission to appeal and the matter will be heard in the Court of Appeal in March 2020.
The case of Re X (FGMPO No 2) [2019] EWHC 1990 (Fam) concerned proceedings brought under Section 5A and Schedule 2 Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 for injunctive orders concerning a two-year-old girl. James Holmes of the Garden Court Family Law Team represented the Local Authority. This was the first case to consider the issue of travel bans under the FGM Act 2003 and the first reported case to go to the Court of Appeal under FGM Act 2003.
Part one of the article was published in the April edition of Family Law Journal. Part Two of the article is available in full on the Lexis library.
