I (A Child), Re

I (A Child), Re

The judge was not obliged to address special guardianship more explicitly as it was not a live issue at trial, and the appellants did not press for it as an alternative. The judge properly considered the necessity of a contact order and concluded it was not in the child's best interests, given the foster carers' positive approach to contact. There was no error in the judge's reasoning or exercise of discretion.

Parties
Appellant: Father; Appellant: Paternal Grandmother; First Respondent: London Borough of Croydon; Second Respondent: Mother; Third Respondent: A (the child, by her Children's Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family Law Public Law Proceedings) / Appeal From Judgment of HHJ Atkins, Post Final Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Adoption, Special Guardianship, Contact Orders, Article 8 ECHR, Care Proceedings
Family Law Child Law Adoption Special Guardianship Contact Orders Article 8 ECHR Care Proceedings

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Father

Appellant

Paternal Grandmother

Appellant

London Borough of Croydon

First Respondent

Mother

Second Respondent

A (the child, by her Children's Guardian)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Law Public Law Proceedings) / Appeal From Judgment of HHJ Atkins, Post Final Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in failing to consider special guardianship as an alternative to a placement order
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to consider or wrongly exercised discretion regarding a contact order

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was not obliged to address special guardianship more explicitly as it was not a live issue at trial, and the appellants did not press for it as an alternative. The judge properly considered the necessity of a contact order and concluded it was not in the child's best interests, given the foster carers' positive approach to contact. There was no error in the judge's reasoning or exercise of discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; no remission for re-trial; no contact order made