K & H (children), Re

The judge at first instance applied the wrong legal test by not requiring a real and immediate risk of significant harm for removal at the interim stage. The process was procedurally flawed, and the appeal was allowed with the children to remain with their father under an interim care order and safeguards.

Parties: Applicant / Local Authority: Hertfordshire County Council; Father / Appellant: Mr K; Third Respondent: Guardian; Second Respondent: Second Respondent
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 20 December 2006
Procedural Posture: Care Proceedings (children) / Appeal From Interim Care Order
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Interim Care Orders, Removal of Children, Case Management, Children's Representation

Family Law Child Protection Interim Care Orders Removal of Children Case Management Children's Representation

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

Parties

Hertfordshire County Council

Applicant / Local Authority

Mr K

Father / Appellant

Guardian

Third Respondent

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (children) / Appeal From Interim Care Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether the judge applied the correct legal test for removal of children at the interim stage
2 Whether the process followed by the local authority and the court was procedurally fair
3 Whether the children's wishes and representation were adequately considered

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

Order below set aside and substituted with an interim care order on terms that the children remain with their father, subject to safeguards and undertakings.
No removal of the children from the father's household without notice and application to the court, save in emergency.