C (A Child) (Care Proceedings – Publication of Judgment), Re

C (A Child) (Care Proceedings – Publication of Judgment), Re

The judgment should be published in a redacted and anonymised form because the public interest in transparency and accountability for systemic failings by public bodies outweighs the risks of identification, provided that careful anonymisation is undertaken. The Local Authority and Police Force should not be named...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: A Local Authority in Wales; First Respondent: Grandmother; Second Respondent: Grandfather; Third Respondent: Mother; Fourth Respondent: Father; Fifth Respondent: Child (via the Guardian); Intervener: A Welsh Police Force
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Care Proceedings / Post Substantive Judgment; Application for Publication of Judgment
Outcome
Judgment to be published in redacted and anonymised form
Legal Topics
Publication of Judgments, Anonymisation, Open Justice, Care Proceedings, Reporting Restrictions
Family Law Children Law Media Law Publication of Judgments Anonymisation Open Justice Care Proceedings Reporting Restrictions

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A Local Authority in Wales

Applicant

Grandmother

First Respondent

Grandfather

Second Respondent

Mother

Third Respondent

Father

Fourth Respondent

Child (via the Guardian)

Fifth Respondent

A Welsh Police Force

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Family Law Care Proceedings / Post Substantive Judgment; Application for Publication of Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judgment granting withdrawal of care proceedings should be published
  2. 2 Whether publication risks identification of the child and family
  3. 3 Whether the Local Authority and Police Force should be named

Ratio Decidendi

The judgment should be published in a redacted and anonymised form because the public interest in transparency and accountability for systemic failings by public bodies outweighs the risks of identification, provided that careful anonymisation is undertaken. The Local Authority and Police Force should not be named to avoid undermining anonymisation. The naming of individual professionals is unnecessary and they should be anonymised. The ongoing police investigation does not justify withholding or deferring publication.

Court Disposition

Judgment to be published in redacted and anonymised form

Orders

  • Judgment to be anonymised and redacted to prevent identification of the child and family
  • Local Authority and Police Force to be referred to generically, not by name