Albert Gibbon

Albert assists parents at all stages of private children’s law disputes. This includes conducting fact-finding hearings where serious allegations of domestic abuse, including sexual violence and coercive and controlling behaviour, are tried.

Albert is comfortable dealing with cases where there are allegations of parental alienation and child abduction. He has often dealt with cases where the children with whom the court is concerned have particularly high levels of need, with life-limiting diagnoses. He has acted in several cases with Guardian appointments, including having appeared for Guardians, as well as for grandparents.

More recently, Albert has been receiving instructions, and takes a keen interest, in proceedings where applications have been made for permanent or temporary relocation, including to non-Hague Convention countries.

Albert often accepts instructions to seek or resist injunctions under the Family Law Act 1996, often in proceedings consolidated with Children Act proceedings.

Selected Cases

C v J

At a two-day fact-finding hearing, Albert successfully secured findings on behalf of his client that her ex-partner behaved in a controlling and coercive manner by way of monitoring her movements, reading her private messages, and also by sexually assaulting her.

C v C

Albert successfully appeared on behalf of the Applicant at an urgent hearing ensuring the immediate return, on the same day of the hearing, of two of the subject children who had not been returned to the Applicant’s care following a contact session in a different part of the country.

H v T

A case in which the Applicant continued making unsubstantiated claims concerning the Respondent’s ability to care for the child. Following Albert’s cross-examination of the Cafcass Family Court Adviser, the Applicant elected not to give evidence, accepted that the Respondent could care for the child, and agreed to the Respondent’s proposals for final arrangements.

F v F

Albert was instructed to appear in proceedings whereby an application had been made to prohibit the Respondent from relocating to a non-Hague Convention country that they had previously temporarily relocated to.

B v V

Albert continues to be instructed in proceedings in which the Respondent has made a cross-application to prohibit the Applicant from travelling to a non-Hague Convention country. The matter has been listed for a final hearing.

W v J

Albert remains instructed in proceedings which are approaching a fact-finding hearing at which, amongst other allegations, allegations of sexual abuse against the Applicant and inappropriate behaviour with the children are to be tested. Ancillary immigration issues have also required a Disclosure Request of the Home Office to be made.

W v S

Albert represented the Respondent throughout proceedings, including at a final hearing, at which the court determined that the Applicant had a lack of insight into the child’s welfare, had acted unreasonably both before and during the litigation, and had an inability to support the Respondent’s relationship with the child. The court made a s91(14) order for a period of three years, and unusually awarded the Respondent ~80% of their costs.

P v P

Albert represented the Respondent in a case where the Applicant’s addiction to alcohol was in question. The court ordered numerous hair strand tests and Albert was able to successfully cross-examine the Applicant to persuade the court that despite the Applicant’s most recent ‘negative’ test, the Applicant continued to have a problem with alcohol consumption, lacked insight into the same, and thus contact could never progress to overnights. The Applicant had also breached a non-molestation, prosecuted in the criminal courts, and made subject to a restraining order.