Private Law

Tina’s private law practice involves working for both applicants and respondents.

She has recently been instructed in a number of cases involving Practice Direction 12J, private law domestic violence in private contact and Child Arrangement orders. She acts in cases where there is an international element.

Public Law

In her public law children work she acts for parents, children, local authorities and extended family.

International and Human Rights

Tina’s practice includes matters with international aspects, including abduction, leave to remove and cross border families. She is also experienced in dealing with in post-care applications and applications for discharge of care or placement orders, leave to oppose adoption orders and contested adoptions. Tina has also worked for parents and Local Authorities in radicalization cases (where parents are accused of supporting ISIS or wishing to take their children to Syria), and more recently where Local Authorities allege that it is the views and ideology of parents that leads to harm of their children.

She has a particular expertise in FII cases and she has a large number of ongoing Ehlers-Danlos/genetic disorder and vitamin deficiency cases.

Recent Cases

• KCC v Mother & Ors [2022] EWHC 2078 (Fam) (27 May 2022) - A case where a child had been murdered by the Father and the mother refused to separate from the him. Prolonged evidence about the ability or otherwise of the mother to separate or to be protective of the remaining children. Tina acted for the Local Authority. The decision sets out the balance of welfare and risk to a child who is at constant risk of abduction by the Father. The case was heard by Mr Justice Williams. 
• Z, Re (Fact Finding, Fatal Head Injury, Domestic Abuse) [2021] EWFC 92 (18 August 2021) - Here a father tortured and then murdered an adopted child. Many cultural issues came in to play where the Afghani family struggled to integrate into UK society. The case required the expert evidence of cultural witnesses and consideration of different cultural social norms as well as the forensic pathological cross examination and analysis of the expert evidence. Tina acted for the Local Authority. The case was heard by Mr Justice Williams. 
• C (Children : Covid-19: Representation) [2020] EWCA Civ 734 (10 June 2020) - In the Court of Appeal Decision – Tina acted for a grandmother intervenor. At the beginning of the Covid pandemic this was one of the seminal cases as to the fairness or otherwise of remote or hybrid hearings. Lord Justice Jackson giving the lead Judgment concluded that a number of aspects of the right to a fair hearing, guaranteed by common law and Article 6 ECHR, are relevant including a balance between delay in an outcome for the children, appearance of fairness, the risk of unfairness and what is considered to be effective participation. The appeal was dismissed. 
• K (Threshold - Cocaine Ingestion - Failure to give evidence) [2020] EWHC 2502 (Fam) (29 September 2020) - Tina acted for an intervenor accused of causing or permitting (or somehow being involved in) the death of a two year old through the ingestion of cocaine. The case required the consideration of experts on the metabolic ingestion of cocaine, the impact of that on the body of a two year old and the timing of her death on relation to the possible perpetrators, as well as the pathological forensic issues. Mr Justice Williams heard the case. 
• A County Council v L & Ors [2021] EWHC 48 (Fam) (28 May 2021) - Tina acted for a mother in this case, where the child suffered multiple head and other boney injuries. The possibility of a genetic component in the causation of the injuries was a significant part of the case. The case was heard by Mr Justice Newton. 
• Lancashire County Council v TP & Ors (Permission to Withdraw Care Proceedings) [2019] EWFC 30 (09 May 2019) -  The treatment of two transgender children had been one of the issues in the case. The decision sets out helpful guidance on leave to withdraw care proceedings and the difficulty and complexity of dealing with transgender children and the understanding of professionals of best practice in such cases.
• Re LG (Re-opening of Fact-finding), Re [2017] EWHC 2626 (Fam) (03 October 2017) - Appeal heard by Mr Justice Baker emphasizing the importance of the active application of Practice Direction 12J (Domestic Abuse in family proceedings) The court must, at all stages of the proceeding consider whether domestic violence is raised as an issue, either by the parties or by Cafcass and if so must: identify at the earliest opportunity the factual and welfare issues involved;consider the nature of any allegation, admission or evidence of domestic violence or abuse, and the extent to which it would be likely to be relevant in deciding whether to make a child arrangements order and, if so, in what terms;give directions to enable contested relevant factual and welfare issues to be tried as soon as possible and fairly;ensure that, where violence or abuse is admitted or proven, any child arrangements order in place protects the safety and well-being of the child and the parent with whom the child is living, and does not expose them to the risk of further harm. In particular, the court must be satisfied that any contact ordered with a parent who has perpetrated violence or abuse is safe and in the best interests of the child; and ensure that any interim child arrangements order (i.e. considered by the court before determination of the facts, and in the absence of admission) is only made having followed the guidance at paragraph 25 to 27 below.
• H (A Child : Hair Strand Testing) [2017] EWFC 64 (29 September 2017) - Mr Justice Peter Jackson (as he then was) giving definitive guidance on the need for caution in and the benefits of hair strand and other drugs testing.
• East Sussex County Council v AG (Finding of Fact) [2017] EWHC 536 (Fam) (06 March 2017) - A case where the mother and father were found to have poisoned their 5 month old son, with life threatening amounts of alcohol and antihistamine.
• AD & AM (Fact-Finding: Re-Hearing) [2016] EWHC 2912 (Fam) (16 November 2016) - A complex case where a Mother, a medical professional, was found to have seriously injured  her infant son, then applied 4 years later to re-open the finding of fact. The re-opening application was granted and the Mother called national and international expert evidence to support her assertion that the accident had a natural cause. The Court gave guidance on the instruction of foreign “experts”. The findings were upheld.
• M (Children), Re [2016] EWCA Civ 937 (09 September 2016) - Acting for a mother in the Court of Appeal where the Court gave guidance as to whether the court has  jurisdiction to make wardship orders once a young person had turned 17 (s.31(3)). The Court of Appeal clarified that the court’s powers to make orders under the wardship jurisdiction were also curtailed heavily by s.100 (2) to (5).
• C, D & E (Children), Re [2015] EWFC 92 (22 May 2015) - Acting for a Local Authority in a historic sexual abuse allegation case where the allegations were made by family members of the most serious abuse. The evidential difficulties of seeking such findings after more than 15 years was explored by the court.
• Devon County Council V EB & ORS (Minors) [2013] EWHC 968 (FAM)  (22 February 2013) - Devon v EB was the first case where EDS was a feature involving infant twins both of whom suffered subdural haemorrhages and bone fractures. Tina Cook QC and Katie Phillips appeared on behalf of the father. The court was unable to make findings and the proceedings were dismissed. The unknown aetiology was of particular importance given the links to EDS.