Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'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
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
View all articles
Authors

CARE PROCEEDINGS: A London Borough v A [2012] EWHC 2203 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 21:01 PM
Slug : care-proceedings-a-london-borough-v-a-2012-ewhc-2203-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 7, 2013, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 101795

(Family Division, Peter Jackson J, 27 July 2012)

Following the father's unsuccessful appeal against findings of fact that he had been responsible for the child's death (Re A (Fact-Finding Hearing: Appeal) [2012] EWCA Civ 1278), the local authority sought care orders in relation to the three surviving children, now aged 6, 18 months and 7 months.

The local authority case was that the children would be at risk of serious and possibly fatal physical harm if they were in the unsupervised care of their father. They would also be at risk of emotional harm if they were raised with a belief, instilled by their father, that one of the siblings was responsible for the child's death.

The mother and father had separated but there were concerns over her ability to keep the children safe taking into account her belief that the father was the victim of a miscarriage of justice. If she were to engage in psychotherapy to address this concern then proceedings would be delayed for an uncertain amount of time but it was realistically possible that within 3 months it could be determined whether there had been a reduction in risk.

The judge narrowly concluded that it was in the children's interests for the mother to be given a final chance to parent the children and protect them from their father. The prize for the children of being cared for by their mother was so valuable that they should only be denied it if the disadvantages of waiting were too great or the chances of success too small.

 

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