LA v DG & Ors

LA v DG & Ors

The threshold for care orders was met due to significant harm from chronic neglect by omission, not commission. The parents, despite support, could not provide good enough care to meet the children’s needs. The children’s welfare required care orders for all, with long-term foster care for the older three and adoption for the younger three. Parental consent to adoption was dispensed with as necessary for the children’s lifelong welfare. The court declined to return the children to Slovakia, as no party sought this and the children’s welfare was best served by remaining in the UK.

Parties
Applicant: A Local Authority; 1st Respondent (mother): DG; 2nd Respondent (father): JT; 3rd – 8th Respondents: X, Y, Z, A, B, C (children) by the Children’s Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Care and Placement Proceedings (public Law Children) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Care orders made for all six children; placement orders for adoption made for the younger three children (A, B, C); permission granted to withdraw placement applications for the older three (X, Y, Z); parental consent to adoption dispensed with for the younger three.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Placement Orders, Adoption, Parental Consent, Neglect, Threshold Criteria, Jurisdiction (brussels II Revised), Sibling Contact, Cultural Heritage in Care
Family Law Child Protection International Family Law Care Orders Placement Orders Adoption Parental Consent Neglect +4 more

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

Parties

A Local Authority

Applicant

DG

1st Respondent (mother)

JT

2nd Respondent (father)

X, Y, Z, A, B, C (children) by the Children’s Guardian

3rd – 8th Respondents

Procedural Posture

Care and Placement Proceedings (public Law Children) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether threshold criteria for care orders under s.31 Children Act 1989 are met
  2. 2 Whether placement orders for adoption should be made for the younger three children
  3. 3 Whether to dispense with parental consent to adoption under s.52(1)(b) Adoption and Children Act 2002

Ratio Decidendi

The threshold for care orders was met due to significant harm from chronic neglect by omission, not commission. The parents, despite support, could not provide good enough care to meet the children’s needs. The children’s welfare required care orders for all, with long-term foster care for the older three and adoption for the younger three. Parental consent to adoption was dispensed with as necessary for the children’s lifelong welfare. The court declined to return the children to Slovakia, as no party sought this and the children’s welfare was best served by remaining in the UK.

Court Disposition

Care orders made for all six children; placement orders for adoption made for the younger three children (A, B, C); permission granted to withdraw placement applications for the older three (X, Y, Z); parental consent to adoption dispensed with for the younger three.

Orders

  • Care orders for all six children
  • Placement orders for adoption for A, B, and C