QS v RS & Anor

QS v RS & Anor

The application to terminate the children’s guardian’s appointment was dismissed because the guardian’s conduct, while unfortunate in expressing a provisional recommendation before seeing all evidence, did not amount to unfairness or bias justifying removal. The guardian is not a decision maker, his evidence can be challenged at trial, and the court retains full discretion to determine the child’s best interests. Procedural safeguards and the ability to cross-examine the guardian ensure fairness, and delay from appointing a new guardian would not be in the child’s best interests.

Parties
Applicant: QS; First Respondent: RS; Second Respondent: T (by her Children’s Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Family / Interlocutory Application (application to Terminate Appointment of Children’s Guardian)
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Children’s Guardians, Apparent Bias, Fair Hearing, Termination of Appointment, Welfare of the Child, Procedural Fairness
Family Law Child Law Children’s Guardians Apparent Bias Fair Hearing Termination of Appointment Welfare of the Child Procedural Fairness

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 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

QS

Applicant

RS

First Respondent

T (by her Children’s Guardian)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Interlocutory Application (application to Terminate Appointment of Children’s Guardian)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the children’s guardian’s appointment should be terminated for apparent bias or unfairness
  2. 2 Whether the guardian’s methodology or conduct justifies removal under FPR 2010 r 16.25(1)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The application to terminate the children’s guardian’s appointment was dismissed because the guardian’s conduct, while unfortunate in expressing a provisional recommendation before seeing all evidence, did not amount to unfairness or bias justifying removal. The guardian is not a decision maker, his evidence can be challenged at trial, and the court retains full discretion to determine the child’s best interests. Procedural safeguards and the ability to cross-examine the guardian ensure fairness, and delay from appointing a new guardian would not be in the child’s best interests.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The mother’s application to terminate the appointment of the children’s guardian is dismissed.