Tower Hamlets v M & Ors

Tower Hamlets v M & Ors

The court found that the children were at risk of significant harm justifying wardship and passport orders, but the local authority failed in its duty of candour by misrepresenting the extent of police consultation. The orders were suspended to allow for proper inter-agency cooperation, which ultimately led to the safe lodging of passports. The judgment reiterates the paramountcy of the child's welfare, the necessity of full candour in ex parte applications, and the importance of inter-agency cooperation.

Parties
Claimant: The London Borough of Tower Hamlets; Defendants: M & Ors; Interested Party: Metropolitan Police; Respondent: First Respondent; Respondent: Second Respondent; Respondent: Third Respondent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Wardship Application (family Division) / Judgment Following Urgent Ex Parte Application and Subsequent Inter Partes Hearings
Outcome
Orders for passport retrieval suspended; wardship maintained; matter adjourned for further cooperation; principles for future applications set out.
Legal Topics
Wardship, Ex Parte Applications, Passport Orders, Risk of International Child Abduction, Duty of Candour, Inter Agency Cooperation, Reporting Restrictions
Family Law Child Protection Public Law Wardship Ex Parte Applications Passport Orders Risk of International Child Abduction Duty of Candour +2 more

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The London Borough of Tower Hamlets

Claimant

M & Ors

Defendants

Metropolitan Police

Interested Party

First Respondent

Respondent

Second Respondent

Respondent

Third Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Wardship Application (family Division) / Judgment Following Urgent Ex Parte Application and Subsequent Inter Partes Hearings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children were at risk of significant harm justifying wardship and passport orders
  2. 2 Whether the local authority fulfilled its duty of candour to the court
  3. 3 Whether the process for ex parte relief was properly followed

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the children were at risk of significant harm justifying wardship and passport orders, but the local authority failed in its duty of candour by misrepresenting the extent of police consultation. The orders were suspended to allow for proper inter-agency cooperation, which ultimately led to the safe lodging of passports. The judgment reiterates the paramountcy of the child's welfare, the necessity of full candour in ex parte applications, and the importance of inter-agency cooperation.

Court Disposition

Orders for passport retrieval suspended; wardship maintained; matter adjourned for further cooperation; principles for future applications set out.

Orders

  • Immediate suspension of earlier passport retrieval orders
  • Wardship of the children maintained