G (A Child)

G (A Child)

The judge was entitled to conclude, on the evidence, that there was a high risk of E suffering physical and emotional harm due to the mother's inability to provide consistent and good enough parenting, her pattern of unstable relationships, and the likelihood that improvements would not be sustained without intensive support. The judge's reasoning was not plainly wrong, and the criticisms of his treatment of the evidence and the guardian's role did not amount to appealable error.

Parties
Applicant/mother: Mrs G; First Respondent/local Authority: Torbay Council; Second Respondent/father: Mr G; Third Respondent/child: E (a child) by Guardian Mrs Taylor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal (care and Placement Orders) / Application for Permission to Appeal And, If Granted, Substantive Appeal
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Adoption, Parental Rights, Child Welfare, Article 8 ECHR, Threshold Criteria Under Children Act 1989
Family Law Child Law Care Orders Adoption Parental Rights Child Welfare Article 8 ECHR Threshold Criteria Under Children Act 1989

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs G

Applicant/mother

Torbay Council

First Respondent/local Authority

Mr G

Second Respondent/father

E (a child) by Guardian Mrs Taylor

Third Respondent/child

Procedural Posture

Appeal (care and Placement Orders) / Application for Permission to Appeal And, If Granted, Substantive Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in making a care order and authorising placement for adoption of E
  2. 2 Whether the judge properly weighed the evidence of the mother's parenting improvements
  3. 3 Whether the judge gave undue weight to the guardian's recommendation

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to conclude, on the evidence, that there was a high risk of E suffering physical and emotional harm due to the mother's inability to provide consistent and good enough parenting, her pattern of unstable relationships, and the likelihood that improvements would not be sustained without intensive support. The judge's reasoning was not plainly wrong, and the criticisms of his treatment of the evidence and the guardian's role did not amount to appealable error.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused
  • Stay on execution of care and placement orders lifted