John Buck

Family

John has gained vast experience over more than two decades in all areas of family law. In care proceedings he is regularly instructed by Local Authorities and on behalf of parents and other relatives alike in cases involving alleged non-accidental injury, fabricated illness, neglect and child cruelty, necessarily involving expert evidence from psychologists, psychiatrists, paediatricians and other medical experts.

He is instructed by both Local Authorities and the Metropolitan Police in cases where issues arise about disclosure of evidence to and from proceedings based on the same facts in the Family Court and criminal prosecutions.

His practice also extends to deprivation of liberty cases in the National DOLS Court; judicial review of decisions by local authorities relating to older children in care; applications pursuant to FPR 14.21 to withhold disclosure of a child’s birth in adoption proceedings from other family members so as to protect the safety of the child and/or its mother.

He is instructed in applications for special guardianship orders; to discharge care orders; leave to oppose adoptions including private adoptions.

He has successfully challenged decisions in care cases and adoptions in the Court of Appeal.

In private law proceedings he specialises in cases involving allegations of domestic abuse and parental alienation, often where the level of parental conflict is such as to necessitate appointment of a Rule 16.4 Guardian to represent the children.

John represents parties in applications for temporary and permanent removal from the jurisdiction to Scotland, EC counties, Switzerland, Japan, India and Pakistan and Australia. On one occasion he represented a young mother whose children had been abducted to the Philippines by the maternal grandmother

He is instructed both by Local Authorities and parents international abduction case (Hague and non-Hague Convention and Brussels II (R) and applications for Forced Marriage Protection Orders.

Residential property

John has considerable experience advising and representing residential landlords and tenants in disputes involving disrepair, dilapidations, service charges and unlawful eviction.

He recently successfully defended a solicitor instructed via Direct Access in her capacity as tenant in a claim by her landlord for part of the costs of building works to the property of which her flat formed a part. He forced the landlord/agent to discontinue two claims: the first on the grounds the claimant had no title to sue in the first place; the second on grounds of non-service or faulty service of statutory notices under the L and T Acts 1985 and 1987 as well as the scope of the works amounting to improvements rather than disrepair.

He is instructed in judicial reviews of homelessness decisions by Local Authorities.

Commercial property

John advises and represents landlords and tenants of commercial premises in disputes under the L & T Act 1954 including renewals, rent reviews, liability for repairs and their apportionment.

Private client

John is regularly instructed on behalf of spouses, other family relatives and intervenors in financial remedy claims in which the assets range in size from a tenancy in a Council flat to multi-million-pound assets spread over numerous jurisdictions.

He drafts and advises upon pre-nuptial, pre-separation and post-separation agreements.

He is experienced in pursuing and defending avoidance of disposition orders and freezing injunctions; enforcement of orders both prosecuting and defending committal applications.

He has defended a wife in a financial remedy claim involving some eight properties and three intervenors where it was alleged Trust Deeds should be set aside for undue influence or as shams.

He is instructed in cases involving validity of foreign marriages and divorces; applications for “top up” financial provision under the MFPA 1984 in international divorce cases.

He appears in the Court of Protection in claims involving the appointment of or removal of Deputies and disputes as to what medical care or treatment is in a patient’s best interests.

He is instructed in Inheritance Act, TOLATA and Schedule 1 Children Act 1989 claims.

He is involved in claims and mediations over Wills it is contended should be set aside for undue influence or fraud. He has been instructed in a case in the Chancery Division where two sisters each sought to have the other removed as a Trustee of their late father and mother’s estates.

Notable cases

Matthews v Matthews (2013) EWCA 1211; (2014) FLR forthcoming
Appeal to the Court of Appeal against part of a final order in financial remedies proceedings before Mostyn J refusing to make an award of spousal maintenance to a wife who had been handicapped in the labour market as a consequence of sadlling matrimonial debt. Both the leave application before Jackson LJ (successful in part) and the substantive hearing before the full court dismissing the appeal have been widely reported.

Waad Al-baghdadi v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (2013) Central London County Court
Represented the victim of misfeasance by the high-ranking ex-police officer Commander Ali Dizaei, twice convicted on the same facts as those giving rise to this claim of perverting the course of justice and misconduct in a public office and sentenced to 4 years’ imprisonment. Obtained a summary judgment when the MPC refused to admit liability and thereafter negotiated an award of £41,000.00 damages.

RE H-T (Children) (2012) EWCA Civ 1215; (2013) 1 FLR
Represented one of two successful appellants against an order under s34(4) CA 1989 allowing a LA to withhold contact to the parents’ children in interim care. Although the parents were the only persons in the frame for haviung sexually abused two of their own children, the appeal was allowed on the basis the circuit judge had wrongly based his decisions on assumptions as to what might happen at a final hearing rather than weighing up the advantages and disadvantages of conTact at an interimstage; and, in particular, whether it could be safely supervised. The leading judgment was by MacFarlane LJ. This is an important case usefully sumamrizing all the authorities of the last 20 years or so on the issue of contact to children in interim care.

RE T (Child), Lawtel Feb 6th 2013
Represented successful appellant mother in the Court of Appeal against an adoption order set aside on the grounds of material irregularities and unfairness in the court below where the judge had been unaware the mother (appearing in person) had not had sight of an adverse report from a Guardian who had not been properly appointed, and had been given no opportunity to challenge it or make submissions upon it. Matter remitted for re-hearing in Hereford County Court by a different judge.

Treasure Island v Care Standard Commission (2003) 223/EA Care Standards Tribunal
Represented owner in her appeal against the Commision’s refusal to register her as a fit person to run a child fostering agency under the Care Standards Act 2000. Involved some 27 live witnesses over 16 days against a QC as an opponent. Benchmark case on burden and standard of proof to establish fitness.

Publications

• Pensions In Ancillary Relief: Seminar Distributed By Association Of Actuaries (2006)
• Enforceability Of Dowries In Ancillary Relief: Family Law (2005)

Qualifications

• MA (Christ Church, Oxford)

Memberships

• FLBA

Languages

• English
• French
• German