Case No. FD22P00083

(A Child) [2020] EWFC 90. In that judgment, I attempted to provide guidance on the substantive principles that should govern such applications. 3.In this judgment, I give further guidance on one aspect of the substance of such applications and also on a number of points of procedure. The application 4.By Form C100 dated 4 February 2022, B’s mother has applied for a Specific Issue Order under s8 of the Children Act 1989 authorising her:i)To accept a French inheritance on B’s behalf; andii)To enter into a valid contract for sale of a French property on B’s behalf.5.B, who is of an age where his views command profound respect, has stated in unequivocal terms that he supports the application. B’s adult sister, who is a respondent to the application, has also stated that she agrees to it. The background 6.B is 17 years old. In 2013, tragically, his father died. At the time of death, B’s father owned a property in France. He died intestate in France. As a result, under French succession law, the property passes in equal shares to B and his adult sister. B is habitually resident in England. It is necessary, under French law, for the heir (in this case B) to accept his/her succession to a French estate. As a minor, B is not able to do so. If he were resident in France, his surviving parent would be able to accept succession on his behalf by a straightforward, essentially administrative, exercise by application to the juge des tutelles. Because he is not resident in France, the French juge des tutelles has declined to accept jurisdiction. The 1996 Hague Convention 7.Article 1 of the 1996 Hague Convention on the Protection of Children states that:(1) The objects of the present Convention are - a) to determine the State whose authorities have jurisdiction to take measures directed to the protection of the person or property of the child; b) to determine which law is to be applied by such authorities in exercising their jurisdiction; c) to determine the law applicable to parental responsibility; d) to provide for the recognition and enforcement of such measures of protection in all Contracting States; e) to establish such co-operation between the authorities of the Contracting States as may be necessary in order to achieve the purposes of this Convention. (2) For the purposes of this Convention, the term ‘parental responsibility' includes parental authority, or any analogous relationship of authority determining the rights, powers and responsibilities of parents, guardians or other legal representatives in relation to the person or the property of the child. Article 3 states that: “The measures referred to in Article 1 may deal in particular with – ……. (g) the administration, conservation or disposal of the child’s property” Article 5 states that: “The judicial or administrative authorities of the Contracting State of the habitual residence of the child have jurisdiction to take measures directed to the protection of the child’s person or property”. 8.In this case, the English court has jurisdiction by reason of B’s habitual residence in this country. Parental responsibility and property 9.In Re AC I said as follows: “17. Section 3 of the Children Act 1989 provides as follows (omitting sub-paragraphs (4) and (5) which are of no relevance to this application): “3. Meaning of “parental responsibility”. E+W (1) In this Act “parental responsibility” means all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his property. (2) It also includes the rights, powers and duties which a guardian of the child’s estate (appointed, before the commencement of section 5, to act generally) would have had in relation to the child and his property. (3) The rights referred to in subsection (2) include, in particular, the right of the guardian to receive or recover in his own name, for the benefit of the child, property of whatever description and wherever situated which the child is entitled to receive or recover.” 18. Sub paragraph (1) is very widely drafted. I do not read into it any restriction to its applicability. It is all encompassing and should be construed purposively. Of particular note in this case is the emphasis on responsibilities as well as rights. Thus, M has a clear responsibility under (1) to act in AC’s interests in relation to property to which he is entitled. By (2) and (3) M has not only rights and powers, but also duties to take steps to receive or recover property for the benefit of the child. The wording of (2) and (3) plainly embraces the Property in this case, being a house in Italy in which AC has an entitlement. And in my judgment a purposive reading of subsections (1) to (3) also includes the responsibility and duty of the person with responsibility to take steps which enable the child to receive or recover property in the child’s own name , and not merely enabling the person with parental responsibility to receive or recover property in his or her own name for the benefit of the child. The former is apt for a situation like the one before me, the latter might be apt where the child has a beneficial interest in property by virtue of trust or otherwise as understood at English law. 19. The diligent researches of Ms Reed QC on behalf of M have uncovered only one reported authority which bears on this topic. In