OCC v P [2020] EWFC B47 (01 June 2020)

OCC v P [2020] EWFC B47 (01 June 2020)

The court found that neither parent had the ability to parent any of the children to a good enough standard, even with support, and that returning B and C to their care would expose them to further neglect and possible significant harm. The court determined that long term foster care, rather than adoption, best met the welfare needs of B and C due to their complex needs, the importance of maintaining their sibling bond, and the low likelihood of finding a joint adoptive placement. The Local Authority's care plans for A (long term foster care) and for B and C (amended to long term foster care) were approved. Placement orders for adoption were refused for B and C.

Citation
[2020] EWFC B47
Parties
Applicant: OCC; First Respondent: M (Mother); Second Respondent: F (Father); Third, Fourth and Fifth Respondents: A, B and C (Children, through Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Care and Placement Order Proceedings / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Final care orders made for A, B, and C; placement orders for adoption refused for B and C; long term foster care approved as the plan for all three children.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Placement Orders, Adoption, Welfare of the Child, Parental Responsibility, Threshold Criteria, Learning Disability and Parenting, Sibling Placement, Remote Hearings
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Placement Orders Adoption Welfare of the Child Parental Responsibility Threshold Criteria +3 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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

OCC

Applicant

M (Mother)

First Respondent

F (Father)

Second Respondent

A, B and C (Children, through Guardian)

Third, Fourth and Fifth Respondents

Procedural Posture

Care and Placement Order Proceedings / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether final care orders and placement orders should be made for children A, B, and C
  2. 2 Whether B and C should be placed for adoption or long term foster care
  3. 3 Whether the parents received adequate support to enable them to care for the children

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that neither parent had the ability to parent any of the children to a good enough standard, even with support, and that returning B and C to their care would expose them to further neglect and possible significant harm. The court determined that long term foster care, rather than adoption, best met the welfare needs of B and C due to their complex needs, the importance of maintaining their sibling bond, and the low likelihood of finding a joint adoptive placement. The Local Authority's care plans for A (long term foster care) and for B and C (amended to long term foster care) were approved. Placement orders for adoption were refused for B and C.

Court Disposition

Final care orders made for A, B, and C; placement orders for adoption refused for B and C; long term foster care approved as the plan for all three children.

Orders

  • Final care order for A with plan for long term foster care.
  • Final care orders for B and C with plan for long term foster care.