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...
Latest articles
Family Law Awards adds a Wellbeing Award - enter now
This past year has been different for everyone, but family law professionals working on the front line of family justice have faced a more challenging, stressful and demanding time than most. To...
Perspectives on civil partnerships and marriages in England and Wales: aspects, attitudes and assessments
IntroductionThis article considers the developments since the turn of the century in the provision of new options for same sex and opposite sex couples to formalise their unions with full legal...
Family Law journal - take the survey and you could win £50 worth of vouchers
Do you subscribe to Family Law journal?Our aim is to provide all subscribers of Family Law with compelling, insightful and helpful content that you enjoy reading and find useful in your...
Commencement date of 6 April 2022 announced for the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020
The Ministry of Justice has announced that the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020 (DDSA 2020), which received Royal Assent on 25 June 2020, will now have a commencement date of 6 April 2022....
HMCTS blog highlights the use of video hearing due to COVID-19
HM Courts & Tribunals Service has published a blog detailing the impacts of coronavirus (COVID-19) on hearings. Pre-pandemic, HMCTS states that the use of video technology for live participation...
View all articles

CARE: Haringey London Borough Council v S [2006] EWHC 2001 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:19 PM
Slug : haringey-london-borough-council-v-s-2006-ewhc-2001-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jul 25, 2006, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 89165

(Family Division; Ryder J; 25 July 2006)

Following criminal and family proceedings arising out of ritual harm to a child, said to be associated with 'ndoki' or 'kindoki', a traditional belief prevalent in Congolese culture colloquially referred to as witchcraft, the court approved careplans in relation to all four of the children involved. The father of two of the children was serving a sentence of 3 years in relation to the ritual harm charges, and those children were now living with the mother but would remain on the child protection register. The court approved this placement. The aunt of the main victim of the attacks was serving a sentence of 8 years, and the child had been placed very successfully with foster carers. The court approved this placement. The mother of the fourth child was also serving a sentence of 8 years in relation to the attacks, and the child had been placed with his father and stepmother. The court would have approved this placement as a permanent arrangement had it not been that sometime after the child was placed with the father and stepmother, the Home Office had indicated its intention to remove both adults from the jurisdiction at the conclusion of the care proceedings. While immigration decisions were not a matter for care proceedings, the basis for the Home Office opinion did not sit easily with the basis for the placement decisions made in the care proceedings. It should be remembered that the child had indefinite leave to remain in the jurisdiction, having lived here since the age of 21 months. Were he to be separated from his father he would experience yet more harm in traumatic circumstances (having been one of the children whose disclosures were integral to the criminal and family proceedings) and would be unable to rely upon his mother for any alternative care or support. There was also evidence that if he returned with the adults to Angola, he would at a later stage be at risk of harm arising from accusations of witchcraft. During the criminal proceedings and thereafter publicity restriction orders were put in place to prevent the identity or whereabouts of the four children becoming known and new and comprehensive orders were made by the court to continue that protection.

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