Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
B, In the Matter Of [2026] EWFC 107 (B) (14 May 2026)
In care proceedings, the court found B suffered significant harm through a serious head injury while in her parents’ care, but could not identify which parent caused it.
The court found B suffered a serious head injury in her parents’ care, but could not identify which parent caused it. Threshold was met; no finding of deliberate injury.
Bristol City Council v M & Anor [2026] EWFC 91 (B) (20 March 2026)
The Family Court made a full care order for C, keeping her at placement A and endorsing a revised contact plan. Rehabilitation home was held not realistic.
Halton Borough Council v A Mother & Ors [2026] EWFC 82 (16 March 2026)
The Family Court found the threshold met for all three children and granted care orders, keeping A in residential care and B and C with long-term foster carers.
Kent County Council v M & Ors [2026] EWFC 60 (B) (02 March 2026)
The court found no proven historic sexual abuse by the father, but held both parents could not safely meet the child's needs. Care and placement orders were made.
London Borough of Ealing v R & Anor [2026] EWFC 42 (B) (20 February 2026)
Family Court granted a final care order and placement order for an infant, finding that the mother’s risks around domestic abuse and stress could not be safely managed.
On the balance of probabilities, neither parent can provide a safe environment for Lily within a reasonable period due to ongoing vulnerability, emotional dependency, and risk of exposure to abusive relationships. Adoption is the only realistic option to secure Lily's welfare and permanence. The threshold for a care order is met, and the welfare of the child requires dispensing with parental consent for a placement order.
Source excerpt
Adoption is necessary and proportionate for Child A as neither parent nor mother's friend D are realistic placement options; further delay is unjustified and contrary to Child A's welfare; the Placement Order application is procedurally valid and the court is satisfied that the threshold criteria are met.
Source excerpt
The court found that the children suffered significant physical and emotional harm in parental care, the parents lack insight and honesty, and no safety plan could mitigate the risk. Adoption with direct sibling contact is the only proportionate and realistic option for the youngest children; long-term foster care for the eldest. Parental consent to adoption is dispensed with as welfare requires it.
Source excerpt
Crawford (A Child), In the Matter Of [2025] EWFC 481 (B) (02 December 2025)
The Family Court made a final care order and placement order for a five-month-old child, finding the mother could not protect her from continuing domestic abuse risk.
Explore more
