Spotlight
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...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
View all articles
Authors

LOCAL AUTHORITY/HUMAN RIGHTS: Re D (Unborn); Bury Metropolitan Borough Council v D [2009] EWHC 446 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 17:37 PM
Slug : re-d-unborn-bury-metropolitan-borough-council-v-d-2009-ewhc-446-fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 4, 2009, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 88819

(Family Division; Munby J; 4 March 2009)

Care and placement orders had been made in relation to the mother's elder child. The mother was pregnant. During a session of supervised contact with the elder child the mother used a cloth to blindfold and gag the child, pinning her to the floor and threatening her with a knife. The two supervising workers had to call the police to resolve the situation. The mother was now in prison, in a very distressed state, and had seemingly attempted suicide on one occasion. The social worker reported that the mother considered that her children 'would be better off dead rather than be in the care of the local authority'. The local authority considered that the mother's unborn child must be removed from the mother at birth, but feared that if this was communicated this to mother, in compliance with the obligation under European Convention on Human Rights, Art 8 to involve the mother in the decision-making process, the mother would harm the baby and herself in the minutes after birth. The local authority sought anticipatory declaratory relief as to whether it would be lawful not to tell the mother about the proposed removal of the child at birth, notwithstanding her Art 8 rights.

Because the child was unborn, the court had no jurisdiction to make either a care or wardship order in respect of the child. However, that did not prevent the court from exercising jurisdiction under the general law to declare the conduct of the local authority either compliant or non-complaint with Art 8.The key question for the court was whether the local authority's proposed action was justified by the 'overriding necessity of interests of child' or by something which was 'essential to secure the child's safety'. In the highly unusual circumstances of this case, the very exceptional step of not engaging the parents fully and frankly in the pre-birth planning process was entirely justified.

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