R (A Child)

R (A Child)

The trial judge erred in failing to make clear findings on the section 31 threshold, failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting expert and guardian evidence, and improperly pursued an unrealistic rehabilitation plan contrary to the weight of evidence. The only proper order was to make the care order sought by the local authority.

Parties
Applicant: Durham County Council; 1st Respondent: Mother of S; 2nd Respondent: Father of S; 3rd Respondent: Guardian ad litem
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Care and Placement Proceedings (child Protection) / Appeal From Refusal of Care and Placement Orders
Outcome
Appeal allowed; care order made; placement order application to be determined separately.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Placement Orders, Domestic Violence, Judicial Discretion, Section 31 Children Act 1989
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Placement Orders Domestic Violence Judicial Discretion Section 31 Children Act 1989

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Durham County Council

Applicant

Mother of S

1st Respondent

Father of S

2nd Respondent

Guardian ad litem

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care and Placement Proceedings (child Protection) / Appeal From Refusal of Care and Placement Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to make a care order and placement order for the child S
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to make adequate findings on the section 31 threshold
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to give proper weight to expert and guardian evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in failing to make clear findings on the section 31 threshold, failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting expert and guardian evidence, and improperly pursued an unrealistic rehabilitation plan contrary to the weight of evidence. The only proper order was to make the care order sought by the local authority.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; care order made; placement order application to be determined separately.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Care order made for child S