A Local Authority v S
The court found that S meets the statutory criteria for secure accommodation under Section 25 of the Children Act 1989, and if not, the requirements for deprivation of liberty under the inherent jurisdiction are satisfied. The order is necessary for S's safety and welfare, and is made for the minimum period considered beneficial.
- Parties
- Applicant: A Local Authority; Respondent: S; Interested Party: S's mother; Interested Party: Children's Guardian
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 15 October 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Child Welfare / Judgment
- Outcome
- secure accommodation order granted
- Legal Topics
- Secure Accommodation, Inherent Jurisdiction, Children Act 1989, Deprivation of Liberty
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
A Local Authority
Applicant
S
Respondent
S's mother
Interested Party
Children's Guardian
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Child Welfare / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether S should be placed in secure accommodation under Section 25 of the Children Act 1989 or the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court
- 2 Whether the statutory criteria for secure accommodation are met
- 3 Whether deprivation of liberty is necessary and proportionate
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that S meets the statutory criteria for secure accommodation under Section 25 of the Children Act 1989, and if not, the requirements for deprivation of liberty under the inherent jurisdiction are satisfied. The order is necessary for S's safety and welfare, and is made for the minimum period considered beneficial.
Court Disposition
secure accommodation order granted
Orders
- S to be kept in secure accommodation for one month
- Local Authority authorised to continue secure accommodation arrangements
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment