Case No. GL20P00553

Black LJ (as she then was) made clear that neither the paramountcy principle in s.1 CA 1989 nor the welfare checklist apply to such applications. In summary, she stated as follows:- (a)Section 10(9) does not contain a test, and by picking out some factors to which the court should have particular regard it acknowledges that there may be other factors that a court has to consider, which will vary infinitely from case to case; (b)One factor will be the prospects of success of the application that is proposed, as leave will not be given for an application which is not arguable; (c)The fact that a person has an arguable case may not necessarily be sufficient to entitle him or her to leave under s 10; as there may be situations in which, when the judge exercises his or her discretion, balancing all the relevant factors, the presence of an arguable case is outweighed by the other factor or factors that carry weight in a particular case; (d)There is room in cases concerning children for applications to be checked at a very early stage and without wholesale investigation. The court has a broad discretion to conduct the case as is most appropriate given the evidence involved and the evidence available; (e)There is no absolute entitlement to an assessment with a view to caring for a child (see