Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

CARE PROCEEDINGS: Re G (Long-Term Fostering: Appeal) [2013] EWCA Civ 330

Sep 29, 2018, 21:04 PM
Slug : care-proceedings-re-g-long-term-fostering-appeal-2013-ewca-civ-330
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 23, 2013, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 102275

(Court of Appeal, McFarlane LJ, 14 March 2013)

The mother's first appeal of a decision to grant a final care order in respect of her 9-year-old child was refused. She now sought permission to appeal that refusal and the care order.

The child was diagnosed with a disorder on the autistic spectrum which made him challenging to care for. The mother's personality and psychological make up had particular needs which drove her to act in a particular way on occasions. During proceedings it was claimed that the mother had on three occasions abandoned the child. The judge made findings on the factual background and the mother had little chance of overturning those findings on appeal.

The care plan was for the child to remain in long-term foster care with regular contact with the mother. The decision to place the child in foster care for the majority of his childhood was draconian. In endorsing such a care plan insufficient analysis had been given to the need to have the child's welfare as the paramount consideration and looking at the prospects of some rehabilitation in the future.

That decision was sufficient reason to grant permission to appeal. 

 

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