A (a child) and M (a child), Re

The trial judge had ample evidence to support the findings that the threshold criteria for care orders were met and that the children's welfare required them to live with their respective fathers. There was no evidence of procedural unfairness or perjured evidence. The judge's exercise of discretion was proper and cannot be interfered with on appeal.

Parties: Applicant/mother: Mrs FM; Father of a: Mr A; Father of P: Mr M; Respondent: Local Authority
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 07 February 2008
Procedural Posture: Civil Family Law (care Orders) / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal)
Outcome: Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Care Orders, Child Custody, Contact Orders, Appeals

Family Law Child Welfare Care Orders Child Custody Contact Orders Appeals

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mrs FM

Applicant/mother

Mr A

Father of a

Mr M

Father of P

Local Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Family Law (care Orders) / Application for Permission to Appeal (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

1 Whether the trial judge erred in making care orders placing the children with their respective fathers under the care of the local authority
2 Whether the evidence before the trial judge was inaccurate or perjured
3 Whether the applicant mother was denied a fair hearing

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

Transcript of the judgment to be prepared at public expense and made available to the applicant mother