J, B, P (Children)(Care), Re [2019] EWFC B47 (10 June 2019)

J, B, P (Children)(Care), Re [2019] EWFC B47 (10 June 2019)

The court found that B's welfare would be best served by placement with her father, who could provide a stable, emotionally supportive environment and consistent care, in contrast to the ongoing instability and emotional harm in the MGM's home. The threshold for significant harm was met in relation to the mother's and P's father's care. The court also determined that J should remain with the MGM under a child arrangements order, and P should be subject to a special guardianship order to the MGM. Defined contact and parental responsibility orders were made to support the children's welfare.

Citation
[2019] EWFC B47
Parties
First Respondent: the mother; Second Respondent: JB's father; Third Respondent: P's father; Fourth Respondent: the MGM; Child: J; Child: B; Child: P
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Part IV Public Law Children Act 1989 Proceedings / Final Judgment After Reserved Decision
Outcome
Orders made for J to live with the MGM under a child arrangements order; P to be subject to a special guardianship order to the MGM; B to live with her father under a child arrangements order with defined contact to the MGM, who is also granted parental responsibility for B.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements Order, Special Guardianship Order, Parental Responsibility, Welfare Principle, Threshold Criteria, Contact Arrangements
Family Law Child Law Child Arrangements Order Special Guardianship Order Parental Responsibility Welfare Principle Threshold Criteria Contact Arrangements

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

the mother

First Respondent

JB's father

Second Respondent

P's father

Third Respondent

the MGM

Fourth Respondent

J

Child

B

Child

P

Child

Procedural Posture

Part IV Public Law Children Act 1989 Proceedings / Final Judgment After Reserved Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether J should remain with the MGM under a child arrangements order
  2. 2 Whether P should be subject to a special guardianship order to the MGM
  3. 3 Whether B should live with her father or the MGM and the appropriate contact and parental responsibility arrangements

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that B's welfare would be best served by placement with her father, who could provide a stable, emotionally supportive environment and consistent care, in contrast to the ongoing instability and emotional harm in the MGM's home. The threshold for significant harm was met in relation to the mother's and P's father's care. The court also determined that J should remain with the MGM under a child arrangements order, and P should be subject to a special guardianship order to the MGM. Defined contact and parental responsibility orders were made to support the children's welfare.

Court Disposition

Orders made for J to live with the MGM under a child arrangements order; P to be subject to a special guardianship order to the MGM; B to live with her father under a child arrangements order with defined contact to the MGM, who is also granted parental responsibility for B.

Orders

  • Child arrangements order for J to live with the MGM
  • Special guardianship order for P to the MGM