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 PROCEEDINGS: Re C (Supervision Order) [2007] EWCA Civ 576

Sep 29, 2018, 17:09 PM
Slug : re-c-supervision-order-2007-ewca-civ-576
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 15, 2007, 08:47 AM
Article ID : 87075

(Court of Appeal; Thorpe, Gage and Toulson LJJ; 15 May 2007)

The mother had been a victim of domestic violence. She reported to the police that the father had shaken the child, a five-week old baby, although the child was unharmed when police officers attended. The father pleaded guilty to common assault. In subsequent care proceedings the judge did not find the allegation that the baby had been shaken to be proved but on evidence of a history of domestic violence made an interim supervision order under s 31 Children Act 1989. The father was excluded from the family home and his contact with the baby restricted to a weekly one hour supervised visit. Both parents appealed the decision and argued that the incidents found proved by the judge were inadequate to amount to the crossing of the threshold under s 31 Children Act 1989, as the judge had not found that the baby had been shaken and as such there was nothing that could justify state intervention in family life.

There was documented evidence of a history of domestic violence between the mother and father and clear indications that the parents were challenged by the demands of a young baby and that there was a risk of violent incidents occurring in future. On this basis the judge had been fully entitled to find as he did. The appeals would be dismissed.

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