W (A Child), Re [2016] EWCA Civ 804 (28 July 2016)

W (A Child), Re [2016] EWCA Civ 804 (28 July 2016)

The subject child's consent is not a prerequisite for a secure accommodation order under s.25 Children Act 1989; the statutory criteria were satisfied as W was at risk of significant harm if not securely accommodated; the order was necessary and proportionate to safeguard W's welfare.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] EWCA Civ 804
Parties
Appellant: W (A Child); Respondent: A Local Authority; Respondent: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Order of High Court (family Division) Regarding Secure Accommodation Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Secure Accommodation Orders, Children Act 1989 S.25, Consent of Minors, Deprivation of Liberty, Proportionality, Child Sexual Exploitation
Family Law Child Law Human Rights Secure Accommodation Orders Children Act 1989 S.25 Consent of Minors Deprivation of Liberty Proportionality +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W (A Child)

Appellant

A Local Authority

Respondent

Children's Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Order of High Court (family Division) Regarding Secure Accommodation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a secure accommodation order under s.25 Children Act 1989 requires the child's consent
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in interpreting 'absconding' under s.25
  3. 3 Whether the deprivation of liberty was a proportionate response to W's behaviour

Ratio Decidendi

The subject child's consent is not a prerequisite for a secure accommodation order under s.25 Children Act 1989; the statutory criteria were satisfied as W was at risk of significant harm if not securely accommodated; the order was necessary and proportionate to safeguard W's welfare.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Order of Keehan J affirmed; secure accommodation order upheld