H (A Child), Re

The judge misdirected herself in concluding she lacked jurisdiction to consider an application for a section 8(1) injunction under the Human Rights Act 1998; the discretion not exercised must be exercised by the trial judge at the earliest opportunity.

Parties: Appellant: Mother; First Respondent: Hertfordshire County Council; Third Respondent: Children’s Guardian; Second Respondent: Second Respondent
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 07 July 2011
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Interlocutory Application in Ongoing Public Law Child Care Proceedings
Outcome: Application granted
Legal Topics: Interim Care Orders, Jurisdiction for Injunctions Under Human Rights Act, Article 8 ECHR Rights, Separation of Parent and Child

Family Law Human Rights Law Interim Care Orders Jurisdiction for Injunctions Under Human Rights Act Article 8 ECHR Rights Separation of Parent and Child

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 5 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mother

Appellant

Hertfordshire County Council

First Respondent

Children’s Guardian

Third Respondent

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Application in Ongoing Public Law Child Care Proceedings

Legal Issues

1 Whether the court has jurisdiction to grant an injunction under section 8(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 to prevent separation of mother and child during interim care proceedings
2 Whether the judge erred in law by concluding she lacked such jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

Interim injunction granted to maintain the status quo and prevent removal of the child from the mother pending the trial judge's consideration of the section 8(1) application.
Case remitted to HHJ Harris to exercise discretion on the injunction at the earliest possible date.