B Council v M & Ors [2025] EWFC 297 (27 August 2025)

B Council v M & Ors [2025] EWFC 297 (27 August 2025)

The court found that the threshold for state intervention was met due to significant emotional harm suffered by X, Y, and Z as a result of the conduct of M and F, including scapegoating, denigration, and inappropriate surveillance. However, the court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that F had sexually abused X as alleged, given the inconsistencies, lack of corroboration, X's mental health and behavioural difficulties, and the absence of supporting evidence. The court accepted the admissions of emotional harm and failure to protect by M and F. A final care order was made for X. Proceedings for Y and Z would continue.

Citation
[2025] EWFC 297
Parties
Applicant: B Council; First Respondent: M; Second Respondent: F; Third Respondent: X (a minor by her Children's Guardian, Dawn Whittaker); Fourth and Fifth Respondents: Y & Z (minors by their Children's Guardian, Jeannie Starkie); Sixth Respondent: G
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (children Act 1989) / Fact Finding and Disposal Hearing for X; Fact Finding Hearing for Y and Z
Outcome
Final care order made for X; proceedings for Y and Z to continue; findings of emotional harm and failure to protect; no finding of sexual abuse by F on balance of probabilities.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Sexual Abuse Allegations, Emotional Harm, Threshold Criteria, Failure to Protect, Fact Finding Hearings
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Sexual Abuse Allegations Emotional Harm Threshold Criteria Failure to Protect Fact Finding Hearings

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B Council

Applicant

M

First Respondent

F

Second Respondent

X (a minor by her Children's Guardian, Dawn Whittaker)

Third Respondent

Y & Z (minors by their Children's Guardian, Jeannie Starkie)

Fourth and Fifth Respondents

G

Sixth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (children Act 1989) / Fact Finding and Disposal Hearing for X; Fact Finding Hearing for Y and Z

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether F sexually abused X
  2. 2 Whether M failed to protect X from harm
  3. 3 Whether Y and Z suffered or were at risk of emotional or sexual harm

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the threshold for state intervention was met due to significant emotional harm suffered by X, Y, and Z as a result of the conduct of M and F, including scapegoating, denigration, and inappropriate surveillance. However, the court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that F had sexually abused X as alleged, given the inconsistencies, lack of corroboration, X's mental health and behavioural difficulties, and the absence of supporting evidence. The court accepted the admissions of emotional harm and failure to protect by M and F. A final care order was made for X. Proceedings for Y and Z would continue.

Court Disposition

Final care order made for X; proceedings for Y and Z to continue; findings of emotional harm and failure to protect; no finding of sexual abuse by F on balance of probabilities.

Orders

  • Final care order in respect of X
  • Further directions for continued proceedings regarding Y and Z