In the matter of B (Children)

In the matter of B (Children)

The appeal is academic as the care proceedings have concluded and no party has appealed the final care orders. The child C was represented by a solicitor appointed by the guardian, and section 41(3) did not apply. There was no breach of Article 6 rights, and the court cannot set aside the care order as it is not...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Guardian (Appellant); Respondent: Local Authority (First Respondent); Respondent: Mother (Second Respondent)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Child Representation, Care Proceedings, Appeal, Children Act 1989, Article 6 ECHR
Family Law Child Representation Care Proceedings Appeal Children Act 1989 Article 6 ECHR

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Guardian (Appellant)

Appellant

Local Authority (First Respondent)

Respondent

Mother (Second Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in determining that the child C should be separately represented in care proceedings
  2. 2 Whether C's Article 6 rights were breached by not having a different solicitor from the guardian's solicitor
  3. 3 Whether the final care order in respect of C could be set aside

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is academic as the care proceedings have concluded and no party has appealed the final care orders. The child C was represented by a solicitor appointed by the guardian, and section 41(3) did not apply. There was no breach of Article 6 rights, and the court cannot set aside the care order as it is not before the court.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.