Z (a child) [2019] EWFC B92 (20 November 2019)

Z (a child) [2019] EWFC B92 (20 November 2019)

The court found that the local authority failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that Z suffered or was likely to suffer significant harm attributable to a lack of reasonable parental care at the relevant time. The evidence did not support findings of physical abuse, neglect, or emotional harm sufficient to meet the statutory threshold under s.31(2) Children Act 1989. Consequently, the threshold for making a care order was not met and the application was dismissed.

Citation
[2019] EWFC B92
Parties
Applicant: Reading Borough Council; 1st Respondent: Mother; 2nd Respondent: Father; 3rd Respondent: PGM; 4th Respondent: Z (through her Children’s Guardian); Intervener: The Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (children Act 1989 S.31) / Final Hearing
Outcome
Application for care order dismissed; threshold not met.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Threshold Criteria, Parental Responsibility, Physical Chastisement, Neglect, Emotional Harm, International Child Care, Section 20 Accommodation
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Threshold Criteria Parental Responsibility Physical Chastisement Neglect Emotional Harm +2 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Reading Borough Council

Applicant

Mother

1st Respondent

Father

2nd Respondent

PGM

3rd Respondent

Z (through her Children’s Guardian)

4th Respondent

The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (children Act 1989 S.31) / Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the threshold criteria under s.31(2) Children Act 1989 are met for Z
  2. 2 Whether Z suffered or was likely to suffer significant harm attributable to the care given or likely to be given if the order were not made
  3. 3 Whether the evidence supports findings of physical abuse, neglect, or emotional harm by PGM or parents

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the local authority failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that Z suffered or was likely to suffer significant harm attributable to a lack of reasonable parental care at the relevant time. The evidence did not support findings of physical abuse, neglect, or emotional harm sufficient to meet the statutory threshold under s.31(2) Children Act 1989. Consequently, the threshold for making a care order was not met and the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for care order dismissed; threshold not met.

Orders

  • Care proceedings dismissed.
  • Z accommodated under section 20 Children Act 1989 with parental agreement pending return to parents.