K (Children)

K (Children)

The judge's assessment of risk at the interim stage was premature and failed to properly balance the history of significant abuse, the minimisation by the mother, and the professional advice. The evidence did not support the conclusion that the incident was a one-off unlikely to be repeated, and the priority must be to keep the children safe from the risks arising from the mother's behaviour. Interim supervision orders were insufficient to protect the children.

Parties
Appellant Local Authority: London Borough of Newham; Respondent: Mother; Respondent: Father; Respondent: Children (O and M) by their Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Family Law Care Proceedings / Appeal From Refusal of Interim Care Orders
Outcome
Appeal allowed; interim care orders reinstated; application to discharge interim care orders dismissed.
Legal Topics
Interim Care Orders, Removal of Children, Proportionality, Risk Assessment, Parental Chastisement
Family Law Child Protection Interim Care Orders Removal of Children Proportionality Risk Assessment Parental Chastisement

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Borough of Newham

Appellant Local Authority

Mother

Respondent

Father

Respondent

Children (O and M) by their Children's Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Care Proceedings / Appeal From Refusal of Interim Care Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge was entitled to discharge interim care orders and return children home at the interim stage
  2. 2 Whether the risk to the children's physical and emotional safety justified immediate separation from parents
  3. 3 Whether the judge properly balanced the risks and benefits of removal versus return

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's assessment of risk at the interim stage was premature and failed to properly balance the history of significant abuse, the minimisation by the mother, and the professional advice. The evidence did not support the conclusion that the incident was a one-off unlikely to be repeated, and the priority must be to keep the children safe from the risks arising from the mother's behaviour. Interim supervision orders were insufficient to protect the children.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; interim care orders reinstated; application to discharge interim care orders dismissed.

Orders

  • Interim care orders reinstated for the children.
  • Parents' application to discharge interim care orders dismissed.