C (Risk of Sexual Harm), Re

C (Risk of Sexual Harm), Re

The court found that C is at risk of significant harm due to the father's history of sexual abuse, the mother's inability to recognise or respond to risk, her failure to engage in sexual abuse awareness work, and repeated breaches of agreements prohibiting unsupervised contact. The risk could not be mitigated by support or supervision. Removal to foster care was necessary and proportionate to safeguard C's welfare.

Parties
Applicant: Slough Children First; First Respondent: Mother; Second Respondent: Father; Third Respondent: C (the child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (public Law) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Final Care Order made; care plan for removal to long-term foster care approved.
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Risk of Sexual Harm, Threshold Criteria, Parental Responsibility, Removal of Child From Parental Care
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Risk of Sexual Harm Threshold Criteria Parental Responsibility Removal of Child From Parental Care

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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Slough Children First

Applicant

Mother

First Respondent

Father

Second Respondent

C (the child)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (public Law) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether threshold for a care order under section 31(2) Children Act 1989 is met
  2. 2 Whether C is at risk of significant harm in the care of his mother
  3. 3 Whether the mother can protect C from risk of sexual harm from the father

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that C is at risk of significant harm due to the father's history of sexual abuse, the mother's inability to recognise or respond to risk, her failure to engage in sexual abuse awareness work, and repeated breaches of agreements prohibiting unsupervised contact. The risk could not be mitigated by support or supervision. Removal to foster care was necessary and proportionate to safeguard C's welfare.

Court Disposition

Final Care Order made; care plan for removal to long-term foster care approved.

Orders

  • Final Care Order pursuant to section 31 Children Act 1989
  • Approval of care plan for removal to long-term foster care