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
Queer(y)ing consummation: an empirical reflection on the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 and the role of consummation
Alexander Maine, Lecturer in Law, Leicester Law School, University of LeicesterKeywords: Consummation – adultery – marriage – empirical research – LGBTQConsummation and...
A v A (Return Without Taking Parent) [2021] EWHC 1439 (Fam)
(Family Division, MacDonald J, 18 May 2021)Abduction – Application for return order under Hague Convention 1980 - Art 13(b) defence – Whether mother’s allegations against the father...
Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers
The Insurance Charities have released an update to the Domestic Abuse Toolkit for Employers.Employers have a duty of care and a legal responsibility to provide a safe and effective work...
Two-week rapid consultation launched on remote, hybrid and in-person family hearings
The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has announced the launch of a two-week rapid consultation on remote, hybrid and in-person hearings in the family justice system and the...
Pension sharing orders: Finch v Baker
The Court of Appeal judgment in Finch v Baker [2021] EWCA Civ 72 was released on 28 January 2021. The judgment provides some useful guidance on not being able to get what are essentially...
View all articles
Authors

CARE: Re S [2008] EWCA Civ 1078

Sep 29, 2018, 17:37 PM
Slug : re-s-2008-ewca-civ-1078
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 12, 2008, 04:23 AM
Article ID : 88799

(Court of Appeal; Mummery and Wall LJJ; 12 August 2008)

The mother had been 16 and in the care of the local authority when she gave birth; the child was placed in a long-term foster placement by the local authority. The authority then placed the mother and child in a residential assessment, but the placement had broken down very quickly. The mother issued an application for another residential assessment, but withdrew that by agreement with the judge. At a relatively late stage she again sought a residential assessment for herself and the child, but the judge dismissed her application. She appealed arguing that, as in Re L and H (Residential Assessment) [2007] EWCA Civ 213, the lack of an assessment left a gap in the evidence relating to the mother's ability to care for the child. Evidence at the appeal hearing made it clear that, if an assessment were ordered, the final hearing would have to be adjourned. Further, there was a risk that at the end of the assessment the child would not be able to return to the foster placement, the only home the child had ever known.

It was clear from the judgment that the judge had balanced the evidence of experts and social workers, some of which supported further assessment. This, in addition to the issue of delay, the mother's behaviour and the risk to the child, meant that the judge had exercised his discretion appropriately.

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