JD & Ors v City & County of Swansea & Anor

JD & Ors v City & County of Swansea & Anor

The judge was plainly wrong to make a final care order at the stage she did, unsupported by expert evidence and without allowing the recommended further work with the parents. The decision was not a measure of last resort and failed to consider the absence of prejudice to the child from a short adjournment. The appeal was allowed, the final care order set aside, and an interim care order substituted with directions for further expert input.

Parties
First Appellant: Mr JD; Second Appellant: Mrs JD; First Respondent: City and County of Swansea; Second Respondent: KD (A Child by her Children’s Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Final Care Order to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; final care order set aside; interim care order made; directions given for further expert assessment and case management.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Risk Assessment, Article 8 ECHR, Expert Evidence, Adjournment, Parental Rights
Family Law Child Protection Human Rights Care Orders Risk Assessment Article 8 ECHR Expert Evidence Adjournment +1 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr JD

First Appellant

Mrs JD

Second Appellant

City and County of Swansea

First Respondent

KD (A Child by her Children’s Guardian)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Final Care Order to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in making a final care order without further expert assessment or adjournment
  2. 2 Whether the judge's findings and rejection of further work with the parents were justified
  3. 3 Whether the care order disproportionately interfered with Article 8 rights

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was plainly wrong to make a final care order at the stage she did, unsupported by expert evidence and without allowing the recommended further work with the parents. The decision was not a measure of last resort and failed to consider the absence of prejudice to the child from a short adjournment. The appeal was allowed, the final care order set aside, and an interim care order substituted with directions for further expert input.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; final care order set aside; interim care order made; directions given for further expert assessment and case management.

Orders

  • Local authority to send relevant judgments and responses to Mr Cullen for review.
  • Mr Cullen to report on whether further work with the parents is worthwhile.