- Alan Ward (judge)
Sir Alan Hylton Ward (born
15 February 1938 ), styled The Rt Hon. Lord Justice Ward, is a judge in theCourt of Appeal of England and Wales and a member of the Privy Council. He is married to leading London divorce solicitor, Helen Ward (b ca 1952), a partner inManches . They had twin daughters: Amelia (who died in 2001 aged 16/17 in a rock-fall accident in South Africa) [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/uk_news/1515494.stm "Judge's daughter 'led life to the full'"] BBC News, Retrieved 10 June 2008. Amelia Ward died Saturday 18 August 2001.] and Kate (b ca 1985), who is the surviving twin.In 2000, Lord Justice Ward, together with Lord Justice Brooke and Lord Justice Robert Walker (now
Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe ) made the decision to separate conjoined twins Gracie and Rosie Attard, refusing their parents' appeal, despite the fact the weaker twin (Rosie) would certainly die. After the surgery, Rosie died and Gracie Attard survived and returned to her nativeMalta .In a landmark ruling on the
21 December 2004 , Lord Justice Ward, together withLord Justice Scott Baker andLady Justice Arden - on the basis of [http://www.fathercare.org/79-7.htm EU Council Directive 79/7/EEC] – also ruled against the Labour Secretary of State of theDepartment for Work and Pensions on the ground ofsex discrimination , when withholding from a separated father with shared care of his child receipt of the appropriateJob Seeker's Allowance child additions (JSA) because he was not in receipt ofChild Benefit for his child.In his judgment Lord Justice Ward stated on the
sex discrimination issue at hand:"The notion that only one parent is to be treated as responsible for his or her child and the other parent is deemed not to be responsible at all is a total anathema to a family lawyer. A cornerstone of the reforming
Children Act 1989 is that where the parents were married to each other at his birth each shall have parental responsibility for the child – see s.2(1). Each may act alone and without the other in meeting that responsibility – see s. 2(7). To be forced to treat only one as responsible where there is a shared residence order in force and in operation is grotesque. It is degrading to fathers who actually – and lovingly – tend to their children. A law so framed is so far removed from reality that it brings the law into disrepute and justifiably fuels the passions of protesting fathers. Both the legal position and the current vociferous protests are factors properly to be taken into account and there is no evidence that they, especially the former, have had any or any adequate consideration. There is no justification for social security law to march out of step with the general law and with the instinctive reactions of reasonable mothers and fathers and this is a further reason why no reasonable Secretary of State should tolerate such a demeaning discrimination against fathers.""Source: [http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2004/1749.html Hockenjos v Secretary of State for Social Security (2004) EWCA Civ 1749 (21 December 2004)] "
References
External links
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/937586.stm Court of Appeal judgment analysis from BBC News]
* [http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2004/1749.html Court of Appeal (Civil Division) judgement Hockenjos v Secretary of State for Social Security 2004 EWCA Civ 1749 (21 December 2004)]
* [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31979L0007:EN:HTML EU Council Directive 79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978]
* Website [http://www.fathercare.org/ FatherCare] by mr. Eugen Hockenjos
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.