London Borough of Redbridge v M & Ors [2025] EWFC 313 (B) (12 September 2025)

London Borough of Redbridge v M & Ors [2025] EWFC 313 (B) (12 September 2025)

The court found that, despite improvements, the mother continues to pose significant risks to the children's welfare due to ongoing substance misuse (cocaine), lack of insight into her mental health needs, and inconsistent engagement with support services. The threshold for care orders is met and it is in the children's best interests to remain together in long-term foster care, with contact arrangements as set out in the LA's final care plan. A Supervision Order would not sufficiently manage the risks. The making of care orders is necessary and proportionate.

Citation
[2025] EWFC 313 (B)
Parties
Applicant Local Authority: London Borough of Redbridge; Respondent Mother: M (Mother); Respondent Father: F (Father); Subject Child: A (Child); Subject Child: B (Child); Children's Guardian: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (public Law) / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Care orders made for both children; children to remain together in long-term foster care.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Supervision Orders, Threshold Criteria, Welfare Checklist, Parental Responsibility, Substance Misuse, Mental Health, Contact Arrangements, Proportionality, Article 8 ECHR
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Supervision Orders Threshold Criteria Welfare Checklist Parental Responsibility Substance Misuse +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Borough of Redbridge

Applicant Local Authority

M (Mother)

Respondent Mother

F (Father)

Respondent Father

A (Child)

Subject Child

B (Child)

Subject Child

Children's Guardian

Children's Guardian

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (public Law) / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether care orders should be made for A and B
  2. 2 Whether the children should be returned to the mother's care or remain in foster care
  3. 3 Whether the threshold criteria under s31 Children Act 1989 are met

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that, despite improvements, the mother continues to pose significant risks to the children's welfare due to ongoing substance misuse (cocaine), lack of insight into her mental health needs, and inconsistent engagement with support services. The threshold for care orders is met and it is in the children's best interests to remain together in long-term foster care, with contact arrangements as set out in the LA's final care plan. A Supervision Order would not sufficiently manage the risks. The making of care orders is necessary and proportionate.

Court Disposition

Care orders made for both children; children to remain together in long-term foster care.

Orders

  • Care orders for A and B in favour of the Local Authority
  • Children to be placed together in long-term foster care