C-G (Children - Appeal) [2014] EWFC B108 (28 August 2014)

C-G (Children - Appeal) [2014] EWFC B108 (28 August 2014)

The lay justices erred by ruling out the parents as carers for the three eldest children before the final hearing without conducting a global, holistic evaluation of all placement options, and without providing an adequately reasoned judgment addressing the welfare balancing exercise required by law.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] EWFC B108
Parties
Applicant: W (Local Authority); Respondent Mother: LT; Second Respondent Father (of Two Youngest Children): AC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal Against Final Care and Placement Orders; Remittal for Final Hearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Placement Orders, Welfare Checklist, Parental Rights, Adoption, Appeals
Family Law Child Protection Care Orders Placement Orders Welfare Checklist Parental Rights Adoption Appeals

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W (Local Authority)

Applicant

LT

Respondent Mother

AC

Second Respondent Father (of Two Youngest Children)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal Against Final Care and Placement Orders; Remittal for Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lay justices erred in ruling out the parents as carers for the three eldest children prior to final hearing
  2. 2 Whether the justices failed to conduct a global, holistic evaluation of all placement options as required by law
  3. 3 Whether the judgment was inadequately reasoned and failed to address the welfare balancing exercise

Ratio Decidendi

The lay justices erred by ruling out the parents as carers for the three eldest children before the final hearing without conducting a global, holistic evaluation of all placement options, and without providing an adequately reasoned judgment addressing the welfare balancing exercise required by law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Case remitted to the lay justices for final hearing; parents to be considered as carers for the three eldest children alongside other options.