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
Resolution issues Brexit notes for family lawyers ahead of IP completion day
Family lawyer organisation, Resolution, has issued two joint notes to assist family lawyers in England and Wales ahead of the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period at 11 pm on 31 December...
Online filing is real-time on New Year's Eve: practice direction change to accommodate EU withdrawal arrangements
I have heard that there will be an amendment to the relevant practice directions to provide that online applications received on New Year’s Eve after 4:30 PM and before 11:00 PM will count as...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
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...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
View all articles
Authors

CARE: CL v East Riding Yorkshire Council, MB and BL (A Child) [2006] EWCA Civ 49

Sep 29, 2018, 17:38 PM
Slug : cl-v-east-riding-yorkshire-council-mb-and-bl-a-child-2006-ewca-civ-49
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 28, 2006, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 88975

(Court of Appeal; Wall LJ and Coleridge J; 7 February 2006) [2006] 2 FLR 24

In care proceedings it was necessary to define with clarity precisely what the local authority was inviting the court to find, especially in a split hearing. The burden was on the local authority to establish that the child's injuries had been non-accidentally caused. The occurrence of accidental injuries was not sufficient to satisfy threshold criteria; serious accidental injuries might occur in the care of conscientious and competent parents. In so far as the judge had found that the threshold criteria had been met because one of the parents was responsible for injuries which were possibly accidental, she was wrong to do so. However, a failure to protect a child following accidental injuries would be relevant to the threshold criteria.

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