Re L (Psychologist - duty to the court) [2011] EWHC B29 (Fam) (20 December 2011)

Re L (Psychologist - duty to the court) [2011] EWHC B29 (Fam) (20 December 2011)

The court found that the mother remains in denial about the findings of non-accidental injury, lacks insight into the risks, and her compliance is superficial. The father's risk is static and manageable, with evidence of insight, acceptance, and willingness to work with professionals. The local authority's plan for L to move to the care of the father and paternal grandparents under a joint residence order, with ongoing supervised contact for the mother and NT, best meets L's welfare needs. Further psychological or medical assessment is not justified given the evidence and delay it would cause.

Citation
[2011] EWHC B29 (Fam)
Parties
Mother: GT; Father: BR; Local Authority: Coventry City Council; Maternal Grandmother: NT
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (public Law, Child Welfare) / Welfare/final Hearing After Fact Finding
Outcome
Residence order in favour of the father and paternal grandparents; supervision order for 12 months; supervised contact for mother and NT; application for further medical investigation refused.
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Residence Orders, Supervision Orders, Risk Assessment, Expert Evidence, Parental Responsibility
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Residence Orders Supervision Orders Risk Assessment Expert Evidence Parental Responsibility

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GT

Mother

BR

Father

Coventry City Council

Local Authority

NT

Maternal Grandmother

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (public Law, Child Welfare) / Welfare/final Hearing After Fact Finding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What are the appropriate arrangements for the residence and contact of L?
  2. 2 Does the mother present a continuing risk of harm to L?
  3. 3 Is the father's risk manageable?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the mother remains in denial about the findings of non-accidental injury, lacks insight into the risks, and her compliance is superficial. The father's risk is static and manageable, with evidence of insight, acceptance, and willingness to work with professionals. The local authority's plan for L to move to the care of the father and paternal grandparents under a joint residence order, with ongoing supervised contact for the mother and NT, best meets L's welfare needs. Further psychological or medical assessment is not justified given the evidence and delay it would cause.

Court Disposition

Residence order in favour of the father and paternal grandparents; supervision order for 12 months; supervised contact for mother and NT; application for further medical investigation refused.

Orders

  • L to reside with father and paternal grandparents under a joint residence order, phased over six weeks.
  • Mother and NT to have regular supervised contact, with NT supervising mother's contact.