England and Wales Case Law

A Local Authority v YL & Anor

The threshold for making a care order was met as the child suffered significant harm due to the mother's chaotic lifestyle, repeated moves, failure to meet medical and educational needs, and inability to provide stable care. The welfare analysis strongly favored the child remaining in long-term foster care, as the mother lacked insight and capacity to provide safe and stable parenting, and the care plan was a proportionate interference with family life.

Source excerpt

• Care orders
• Threshold criteria
• Welfare checklist
• Parental capability
• International movement of children
• Language and cultural identity

Read case analysis

London Borough of Merton v E & Ors

Placement with MGM under a Special Guardianship Order is the best and right outcome for Z, as it offers stability, permanence, and meets her welfare needs. J has not sufficiently engaged with recommendations or demonstrated capability to provide consistent care. Further delay or assessment is contrary to Z’s welfare.

Source excerpt

• Special guardianship order
• Supervision order
• Child welfare
• Domestic abuse
• Parental capability
• Delay in proceedings

Read case analysis

James and Alison (Children) (Care Proceedings), Re

James and Alison (Children) (Care Proceedings), Re [2024] EWFC 142 (B) (24 May 2024)

Family Court care proceedings in which the court rejected a care order for Alison and instead made a 12-month supervision order, while approving James’s 12-month supervision plan.

• Care orders
• Supervision orders
• Welfare of the child
• Threshold criteria
• Parental capability
• Child sexual exploitation risk

Read case analysis

OCC v P

OCC v P [2020] EWFC B48 (21 October 2020)

The Family Court found threshold met in care proceedings concerning A, a 10-month-old child, and made care and placement orders for adoption.

• Care orders
• Placement orders
• Adoption
• Domestic abuse
• Drug misuse
• Mental health

Read case analysis

J and K (care orders)

J and K (care orders) [2017] EWFC B37 (7 March 2017)

The court made care orders for two children, finding section 31 threshold met and approving long-term foster care because neither parent could meet their welfare needs.

• Care orders
• Threshold criteria
• Welfare checklist
• Significant harm
• Parental capability
• Long-term foster care

Read case analysis

London Borough of Newham v KA (Mother) & Ors

London Borough of Newham v KA (Mother) & Ors [2016] EWFC B11 (04 March 2016)

Care proceedings concerning four children. The court found threshold crossed, ordered them to live with their father, refused an adjournment, and made a supervision order and immunisation order.

• Care orders
• Child arrangements orders
• Supervision orders
• Threshold criteria
• Welfare checklist
• Parental capability

Read case analysis

M & Ors v Suffolk County Council

The Court of Appeal dismissed a mother’s and grandparents’ appeal against care and placement orders, holding the judge’s welfare and proportionality analysis was sound.

• Care orders
• Placement orders
• Special guardianship
• Welfare analysis
• Proportionality
• Parental capability

Read case analysis

M & Anor (Children)

M & Anor (Children) [2008] EWHC 2281 (Fam) (06 October 2008)

Munby J warned family practitioners to coordinate closely with parallel immigration and other proceedings, after two children cases were delayed by missing information.

• Residence orders
• Removal from jurisdiction
• Parental capability
• Concurrent proceedings
• Communication with home office
• Delay in proceedings

Read case analysis

M & Anor (Children)

The court criticised poor coordination between family and immigration lawyers, stressing the need for up-to-date information on parallel proceedings affecting children.

• Residence orders
• Child removal from jurisdiction
• Parental capability
• Parallel proceedings
• Protocol for communicating with home office
• Family-law

Read case analysis

Local Authority X v M

Local Authority X v M [2010] EWCC 34 (Fam) (2010)

The court found that the threshold criteria under s.31 Children Act 1989 were met due to the mother's ongoing inability to protect her child from harm, her continued association with a violent partner, and her failure to engage meaningfully with support services. The court held that the only realistic option in the child's welfare was to make a care order with a plan for adoption, as delay would be detrimental and the mother had not demonstrated sufficient change.

Source excerpt

• Care orders
• Adoption
• Threshold criteria
• Domestic violence
• Parental capability
• Welfare of the child

Read case analysis