S & L (Children), Re

S & L (Children), Re

The judge erred in refusing to permit psychological and parenting assessments of the father, as his decision was premature, inadequately reasoned, and failed to consider the interests of the children and the prior order for assessment. The appellate court allowed the appeal and ordered the assessments to proceed.

Parties
Appellant: Father; First Respondent: Local Authority; Respondent: Mother; Respondent: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (children) / Appeal From Fact Finding and Case Management Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Parental Assessment, Case Management Discretion, Public Funding in Family Cases

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Father

Appellant

Local Authority

First Respondent

Mother

Respondent

Children's Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (children) / Appeal From Fact Finding and Case Management Decision

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing to permit psychological and parenting assessments of the father in care proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the judge's exercise of discretion in case management was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in refusing to permit psychological and parenting assessments of the father, as his decision was premature, inadequately reasoned, and failed to consider the interests of the children and the prior order for assessment. The appellate court allowed the appeal and ordered the assessments to proceed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Permission granted for psychological and parenting assessments of the father to be carried out