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

INTERIM CARE ORDERS: Re B (Children); MB v County Council, AB and KB and EB [2010] EWCA Civ 324

Sep 29, 2018, 17:49 PM
Slug : interim-care-orders-re-b-children-mb-v-county-council-ab-and-kb-and-eb-2010-ewca-civ-324
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 30, 2010, 11:00 AM
Article ID : 90789

(Court of Appeal; Thorpe, Wall and Aikens LJJ; 30 March 2010)

The judge made an interim care order to permit the local authority to place the two younger children with foster carers pending an assessment of the mother's ability to care for her children. The two older children had expressed a very strong desire to return to the mother's care, and on practical grounds this had been agreed by the local authority. The main focus was whether the mother was able to disengage from a relationship with the violent father.

The appeal was dismissed. Interim care orders were an appropriate mechanism to achieve the local authority's objective. Once the threshold criteria was met (and it was accepted that they had been), whether or not an interim care orders were made was a welfare issue, and did not involve a test whether there was 'an urgent need to keep the children from their mother'. Interim care orders could last only 8 weeks from the date of the first order and 4 weeks from all subsequent orders however long it was going to take for the final hearing to come on. It had been imperative that the sensible conditions that the authority was offering the mother for return of the children should have been reduced to writing.

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