N (a Child), Re

N (a Child), Re

A discrete fact-finding hearing regarding MY's death is not necessary for the proper resolution of N's case, would not be proportionate, and may be inconclusive. The risk to N can be managed based on current knowledge and ongoing assessment, without delaying permanency planning.

Parties
Applicant: A Local Authority; First Respondent: K; Second Respondent: N; Third Respondent: N (By his children’s guardian MK)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings / Adjourned Case Management Conference
Outcome
Application for discrete fact-finding hearing refused
Legal Topics
Fact Finding Hearings, Threshold Criteria, Case Management, Expert Evidence, Child Welfare

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A Local Authority

Applicant

K

First Respondent

N

Second Respondent

N (By his children’s guardian MK)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings / Adjourned Case Management Conference

  1. 1 Whether a discrete fact-finding hearing is necessary to determine the cause of MY's death for planning N's care
  2. 2 Whether the threshold criteria under section 31(2) Children Act are met
  3. 3 Whether the risk to N can be managed without a fact-finding hearing

Ratio Decidendi

A discrete fact-finding hearing regarding MY's death is not necessary for the proper resolution of N's case, would not be proportionate, and may be inconclusive. The risk to N can be managed based on current knowledge and ongoing assessment, without delaying permanency planning.

Court Disposition

Application for discrete fact-finding hearing refused

Orders

  • No discrete fact-finding hearing to be held
  • Next hearing to be Issues Resolution Hearing (IRH)