Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
View all articles
Authors

CAPACITY: Coventry City Council v C, B, CA and CH [2012] EWHC 2190 (Fam), [2012] COPLR 658

Sep 29, 2018, 20:35 PM
Slug : capacity-coventry-city-council-v-c-b-ca-and-ch-2012-ewhc-2190-fam-2012-coplr-658
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 6, 2013, 09:08 AM
Article ID : 101623

(Family Division, Hedley J, 30 July 2012) 

The mother, who had experienced a disrupted childhood, was vulnerable and suffered from significant learning difficulties. Her three previous children were all placed for adoption and the local authority plan was for the most recent baby to be adopted. The mother opposed adoption and wished to care for her.

Previous assessments of her parenting capacity were all negative. On the day of the birth the mother consented to accommodation of the child pursuant to s 20 of the Children Act 1989 but the mother did not have access to her lawyer until after the child's placement.

The mother and child claimed under s 7 of the Human Rights Act 1998. It was clear that the baby's best interests were fulfilled by adoption. However, the local authority accepted that the rights of the mother and baby under Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 were breached on the day of the child's birth. The mother could only provide the relevant consent under s 20 if she had the requisite capacity in light of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Hedley J provided guidance on s 20 procedures, approved by the President of the Family Division.

 

Categories :
  • Court of Protection
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from