P (A Child) [1999] EWCA Civ 1323 (30 April 1999)

P (A Child) [1999] EWCA Civ 1323 (30 April 1999)

The welfare of the child, who has lived with the foster parents since infancy and formed an exceptionally strong attachment, requires that she remain with them. Her limited capacity to appreciate her Jewish heritage does not outweigh the risk of significant emotional harm from a move. The stability of her placement is paramount. Contact with her natural parents should be limited to four times a year to avoid destabilising her placement. A section 91(14) order is justified to prevent further disruptive applications.

Citation
[1999] EWCA Civ 1323
Parties
Appellant (natural Parents): P family (Rabbi P and Mrs P); First and Second Respondents (foster Parents): C family (Mr and Mrs C); Third Respondent (guardian Ad Litem): Official Solicitor (on behalf of N, the child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal (children Act Proceedings) / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Residence Orders, Contact Orders, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Welfare of the Child, Religious and Cultural Heritage, Attachment and Psychological Parenting
Family Law Child Law Residence Orders Contact Orders Section 91(14) Children Act 1989 Welfare of the Child Religious and Cultural Heritage Attachment and Psychological Parenting

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P family (Rabbi P and Mrs P)

Appellant (natural Parents)

C family (Mr and Mrs C)

First and Second Respondents (foster Parents)

Official Solicitor (on behalf of N, the child)

Third Respondent (guardian Ad Litem)

Procedural Posture

Appeal (children Act Proceedings) / Appeal From High Court (family Division) to Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the residence order in favour of the foster parents should be varied to return the child to her natural parents
  2. 2 Whether contact between the child and her natural parents should be increased
  3. 3 Whether a section 91(14) order restricting further applications without leave should be imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The welfare of the child, who has lived with the foster parents since infancy and formed an exceptionally strong attachment, requires that she remain with them. Her limited capacity to appreciate her Jewish heritage does not outweigh the risk of significant emotional harm from a move. The stability of her placement is paramount. Contact with her natural parents should be limited to four times a year to avoid destabilising her placement. A section 91(14) order is justified to prevent further disruptive applications.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Residence order in favour of foster parents (C family) affirmed
  • Contact between child and natural parents limited to four times a year