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
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
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...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
View all articles
Authors

Re Y (Children) [2016] EWCA Civ 1091

Sep 29, 2018, 19:33 PM
Public law children – Care proceedings – Appeal from care and placement orders – Unrepresented parents - Care plan for adoption – Whether the judge failed to consider long-term adoption
The father’s appeal from care and placement orders in relation to the two children was allowed.
Slug : re-y-children-2016-ewca-civ-1091
Meta Title : Re Y (Children) [2016] EWCA Civ 1091
Meta Keywords : Public law children – Care proceedings – Appeal from care and placement orders – Unrepresented parents - Care plan for adoption – Whether the judge failed to consider long-term adoption
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Nov 14, 2016, 10:57 AM
Article ID : 113345

(Court of Appeal, Hallett, Elias, King LJJ, 8 November 2016)

Public law children – Care proceedings – Appeal from care and placement orders – Unrepresented parents - Care plan for adoption – Whether the judge failed to consider long-term adoption

The father’s appeal from care and placement orders in relation to the two children was allowed.

The parents, of South Indian origin, and their two children, now aged 7 and 4 came to the attention of the local authority when the father lost his job and was unable to provide for the family. The parents had been refused leave to remain by the immigration authorities. Financial support was provided after the children were made subject to a child in need plan. However, the parents were in conflict with the local authority due to their belief that the local authority was wholly responsible for providing for them. The father exhibited extreme behaviour and threatened to jump off a bridge if they were not given a new house and financial support.

Attempts were made to work with the parents but the local authority initiated care proceedings due to the parents using the children as a means to put pressure on the local authority to give them more money with a wholly callous disregard for their emotional well-being.

The children were removed from the family home and placed in a culturally appropriate foster home. The parents refused to sign a contact agreement and no contact took place. During the proceedings the mother became pregnant and travelled to Singapore.

All the evidence indicated that the local authority throughout anticipated that the children would be rehabilitated to their parents’care. By November 2015 the local authority recommended that the children should remain in long-term foster care. Shortly after that recommendation changed to one for adoption. The guardian reluctantly agreed to the amended care plan on the basis of the children staying together and that the search for an adoptive placement was time limited to 12 months. If no placement could be found they would remain in long-term foster care.

At the final hearing the parents were unrepresented and the mother did not attend. Significant findings of emotional abuse were made and the judge approved the local authority’s care plan without making any mention of long-term fostering. Care and placement orders were made. The father appealed.

The appeal was allowed and the case was remitted for reconsideration.

The Court of Appeal noted that if the father had been represented there would have undoubtedly been a heavy focus on a care plan of long-term fostering as opposed to adoption. Judges faced with litigants in person had to be alive to issues which should and would have been raised if the parent had been legally presented. Similarly local authorities were under an absolute obligation to ensure that the court considered all matters relevant to the child’s welfare even when it might undermine their forensic goal.



Neutral Citation Number: [2016] EWCA Civ 1091

Case No: B4/2016/1053

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
BIRMINGHAM CIVIL JUSTICE CENTRE
Her Honour Judge Evans Gordon
BM15CO0211

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL


Date: 08/11/2016
Before:


LADY JUSTICE HALLETT
LORD JUSTICE ELIAS
and
LADY JUSTICE KING


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


Between:


Y (Children)


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


Danish Ameen (instructed by KHF Solicitors) for the Appellant
Ruth Cabeza and Anita Rao (instructed by Birmingham City Council) for the 1st Respondent
Catherine Preen (instructed by Baches Solicitors) for the 3rd and 4th Respondents


Hearing date : 27 October 2016


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


Judgment Approved

Re Y (Children) [2016] EWCA Civ 1091.rtf
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Public Law Children
Tags :
FLR_cover
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from