C (A Child), Re [2010] EWMC 61 (FPC) (2010)
The court found that the threshold criteria under section 31 of the Children Act 1989 were met due to the mother's inability to provide adequate care and her lack of engagement. The welfare of the child required a Special Guardianship Order in favour of D, supported by the father and the Children's Guardian. The...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] EWMC 61 (FPC)
- Parties
- Applicant: X Local Authority; 1st Respondent: Miss A; 2nd Respondent: C (a child)
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Procedural Posture
- Care Proceedings / Final Hearing
- Outcome
- Special Guardianship Order granted; change of name granted.
- Legal Topics
- Care Proceedings, Special Guardianship Order, Change of Name, Welfare of the Child, Threshold Criteria
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
X Local Authority
Applicant
Miss A
1st Respondent
C (a child)
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings / Final Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the threshold criteria under section 31 of the Children Act 1989 are met
- 2 Whether a Special Guardianship Order should be made in favour of D
- 3 Whether the child's name should be changed
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the threshold criteria under section 31 of the Children Act 1989 were met due to the mother's inability to provide adequate care and her lack of engagement. The welfare of the child required a Special Guardianship Order in favour of D, supported by the father and the Children's Guardian. The change of name was also in the child's best interests.
Court Disposition
Special Guardianship Order granted; change of name granted.
Orders
- Special Guardianship Order in respect of C in favour of D
- C's name to be changed to Z
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment