J (Children), Re
The judge failed to accord procedural fairness by making final care orders at an IRH without a contested hearing, updated case analysis, or proper representation for the children, thereby breaching Article 6 and 8 ECHR rights.
- Parties
- Appellant: A McC; 1st Respondent: The London Borough of Wandsworth; 2nd Respondent: A J; 3rd Respondent: C J; 4th Respondent: J J; Intervener: Children’s Guardian (Intervener)
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 23 May 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Care Proceedings / Appeal Against Final Care Orders
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Procedural Fairness, Care Orders, Children's Guardian Role, Article 6 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
A McC
Appellant
The London Borough of Wandsworth
1st Respondent
A J
2nd Respondent
C J
3rd Respondent
J J
4th Respondent
Children’s Guardian (Intervener)
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings / Appeal Against Final Care Orders
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the judge was wrong in the procedure adopted to make substantive care orders at the IRH
- 2 Whether procedural fairness was accorded to the mother and children
- 3 Whether the absence of a contested final hearing and updated case analysis undermined the integrity of the decision
Ratio Decidendi
The judge failed to accord procedural fairness by making final care orders at an IRH without a contested hearing, updated case analysis, or proper representation for the children, thereby breaching Article 6 and 8 ECHR rights.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Final care orders set aside
- Case to be listed for directions within 7 days before the President for re-hearing
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