How many times has [2021] EWHC 1699 (Fam) been cited?

[2021] EWHC 1699 (Fam) is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2021] EWHC 1699 (Fam)

· cited by 2 · influence score 13/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 2

Cited — Rashid Maqsood Abbasi & Anor v Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 2023-03-31
“…n 23 June 2021 Sir Andrew McFarlane P (“the President”) dismissed separate applications by the parents of two children to discharge the RROs made in each case: [2021] EWHC 1699 (Fam).…”
Cited — Michael Clifford v Millicom Services UK Limited & Ors. 2023-01-26
“…e 8(2); and the right to respect for private and family life can extend to workplace relationships. For the former proposition, Eady P cited Abbasi v Newcastle [2021] EWHC 1699 (Fam) [105]-[107] (Sir Andrew McFarlane P). For the latter, she cited Niemitz v Germany (1993) 16 EHRR 97[29]-[31].…”