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
What happens when assets are tainted: financial remedies v confiscation proceedings revisited
Sarah Wood, 5SAHFollowing on from her 2019 article 'Financial Remedies v Confiscation Proceedings: What Takes Priority?’ ([2019] Fam Law 941) in which Sarah Wood looked, in general terms, about...
Disclosure 2: This time it’s practical
Andrew Shaw, New Court ChambersSam Prout, New Court ChambersThis article aims to provide a practical guide to navigating some disclosure issues that can arise in family proceedings concerning...
Placing looked after children outside of the jurisdiction (post-Brexit)
Michael Jones, Deans Court ChambersA summary of the legal provisions that apply to placing looked after children outside the jurisdiction of England and Wales. This article contains a brief summary of...
Rings, Rolexes and Renoirs – The treatment of gifts, engagement rings, and heirlooms when a relationship comes to an end
Sarah Dodds, Senior Associate, Kingsley NapleyLiam Hurren, Trainee Solicitor, Kingsley NapleyWhen a couple separates, thoughts often turn to the valuable or sentimental items which they acquired or...
HM Treasury responds to consultation on increasing normal minimum pension age
HM Treasury  has responded to its consultation on the proposed protections framework and implementing an increase of the normal minimum pension age (NMPA) from 55 to 57 in 2028, which will...
View all articles

Re W (A Child) [2016] EWCA Civ 1051

Sep 29, 2018, 19:32 PM
Public law children – Care proceedings – Separate representation of the child
The girl’s appeal from a decision refusing her separate representation in public law children proceedings was allowed.
Slug : re-w-a-child-2016-ewca-civ-1051
Meta Title : Re W (A Child) [2016] EWCA Civ 1051
Meta Keywords : Public law children – Care proceedings – Separate representation of the child
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 9, 2016, 04:55 AM
Article ID : 113333

(Court of Appeal, Black, Tomlinson LJJ, 1 November 2016)

Public law children – Care proceedings – Separate representation of the child

The girl’s appeal from a decision refusing her separate representation in public law children proceedings was allowed.

The 16-year-old girl had been the subject of care proceedings during which she had been separately represented. Her position was that she did not accept the judge’s findings and wished to return home. A care order was made in 2015.

She absconded on a number of occasions for the foster home and then lived with her grandmother’s home. When the parents moved to live with the grandmother the local authority applied for a recovery order pursuant to s 50 of the Children Act 1989 to return her to foster care.

The girl, as a litigant in person, attempted to discharge the care orders made in respect of herself and her brother.

In the recovery order proceedings the issue arose of whether the girl was competent to instruct her own solicitor. A child and adolescent psychiatrist was appointed to report but the girl failed to attend her appointment. The judge refused to grant her separate representation and found that she had not demonstrated that she was not being influenced by her parents to conduct litigation and that she did not understand the risks and had insufficient understanding of the issues. A recovery order was made.

At a later date the judge dismissed the discharge application. The girl did not attend since she lacked separate representation and her interests were represented by the guardian. The girl appealed the decision in relation to separate representation.

The test for establishing whether a child should instruct his or her own solicitor was set out in FPR 16.29(2). If the guardian’s solicitor considered that a child wished to give instructions other than those given by the guardian then the child was able (depending on his or her understanding) to give such instructions and the solicitor must follow them.

In this instance it was clear that the girl wished to give instructions differing from the guardian and, therefore, it fell to be determined whether she was able to give them. The court noted the importance of the child’s autonomy and that it might be in the child’s interests to have some direct involvement in the litigation.

The appeal was allowed. The judge below had confused the child’s welfare with her understanding when applying the test in FPR 16.29(2). Further, the judge had given too little weight to the girl’s age, her history of instructing her own solicitor and the views of that solicitor. Too much weight was given to the concerns of parental influence.

Case No: B4/2016/2037 & 2056

Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1051

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 01/11/2016



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Ms Alev Giz (instructed by Philcox Gray Solicitors) for the Appellant
Mr Nicholas O’Brien (instructed by the local authority) for the Respondent
Ms Gill Honeyman (instructed by Covent Garden Family Law) for the Children’s Guardian
The father in person 
The Mother did not attend and was not represented

Hearing dates: 6th October 2016

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Re W (A Child) [2016] EWCA Civ 1051.rtf
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Public Law Children
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from