C (A Child), Re

C (A Child), Re

The judge was entitled to suspend direct contact for 18 months based on powerful evidence that immediate contact would be significantly damaging to the child, and the mother needed to address her emotional and behavioural issues before contact could resume. The judge had sufficient expert evidence and was not required to order further assessment. The section 91(14) order was proportionate and justified.

Parties
Appellant: AL; First Respondent: JH; Second Respondent: C (by her guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Child Contact, Parental Rights, Welfare of the Child, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Human Rights (article 8)

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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AL

Appellant

JH

First Respondent

C (by her guardian)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether suspension of direct contact between mother and child was justified
  2. 2 Whether judge failed to promote contact and apply stricter scrutiny
  3. 3 Whether section 91(14) order was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to suspend direct contact for 18 months based on powerful evidence that immediate contact would be significantly damaging to the child, and the mother needed to address her emotional and behavioural issues before contact could resume. The judge had sufficient expert evidence and was not required to order further assessment. The section 91(14) order was proportionate and justified.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No direct contact between mother and child for 18 months
  • Indirect contact (letters, cards, presents, photographs) permitted