England and Wales Case Law

Marcia Janice Steele v Ofsted

The evidence demonstrates grave concerns about the appellant's judgment and ability to safeguard children, particularly her failure to prevent children being present during a scheduled eviction and her actions to delay enforcement using children. The threshold for suspension under regulation 9 is met, and the suspension decision is necessary, justified, and proportionate pending further investigation.

Source excerpt

• Suspension of registration
• Risk assessment
• Proportionality
• Public interest
• Safeguarding children

Read case analysis

Alex Homer v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The Tribunal partly allowed an FOIA appeal over a child safeguarding review, ordering disclosure of a redacted report while protecting identifying and sensitive personal data.

• Freedom of information act (foia) exemptions
• Personal data
• Special category data
• Disclosure and redaction
• Safeguarding children
• Anonymity of victims

Read case analysis

M v Ofsted

The appellant is not suitable to be registered as a childminder due to repeated safeguarding failures, lack of candour and honesty with the regulator, and an inadequate response to a serious safeguarding allegation. The decision to cancel registration was lawful, necessary, and proportionate to protect children and public confidence. The appellant's conduct demonstrated a lack of understanding of safeguarding and an unwillingness to accept responsibility, justifying cancellation under the statutory framework.

Source excerpt

• Suitability of childcare provider
• Safeguarding children
• Statutory framework compliance
• Proportionality of regulatory action
• Notification requirements
• Honesty and integrity in regulatory context

Read case analysis

Mrs and Mr Chamberlain v Care Inspectorate Wales

The Tribunal found that there was cogent evidence that Mr Chamberlain's behaviour on 22 October 2025 was verbally and physically aggressive in the presence of minded children, exposing them to a risk of significant harm as defined by law. Mrs Chamberlain demonstrated lack of insight and control over the situation, and the evidence suggested she may not prioritise the children's welfare or comply with conditions. The risk to children outweighed the adverse impact on the appellants and affected families. The suspensions were necessary, justified, and proportionate to protect children from harm.

Source excerpt

• Childminding registration suspension
• Safeguarding children
• Risk assessment
• Proportionality of regulatory action
• Appeals against regulatory decisions

Read case analysis

Bailey, R (On the Application Of) v HM Senior Coroner For East London

Bailey, R (On the Application Of) v HM Senior Coroner For East London [2025] EWHC 1637 (Admin) (30 June 2025)

Judicial review dismissed: the court held that prior investigations into a child’s death satisfied Article 2 ECHR, so the coroner was not required to resume the inquest.

• Article 2 echr
• Inquest resumption
• State investigative obligation
• Safeguarding children
• Procedural duty
• Multi-agency safeguarding

Read case analysis

X & Y (Children: Withdrawal of Proceedings), Re

The applicant cannot establish the threshold criteria for making a care or supervision order as the evidence does not support the allegation that AH administered morphine to X in a manner causing significant harm. The expert evidence is inconclusive as to the timing and cause of the morphine in X's system, and the nursing evidence does not support the opportunity for improper administration. Therefore, permission to withdraw the proceedings is granted and the case is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Withdrawal of care proceedings
• Threshold criteria under children act 1989
• Fact-finding hearings
• Safeguarding children

Read case analysis

N, Re (Children: Fact Finding - Perplexing Presentation/Fabricated or Induced Illness) (Rev1)

N, Re (Children: Fact Finding - Perplexing Presentation/Fabricated or Induced Illness) (Rev1) [2024] EWFC 326 (11 October 2024)

Fact-finding judgment in care proceedings: the court found the mother covertly sedated B, siphoned blood from B, and fabricated or exaggerated the children’s symptoms.

• Fabricated or induced illness
• Perplexing presentation
• Threshold criteria
• Medical harm
• Safeguarding children
• Fabricated-or-induced-illness

Read case analysis

Sutcliffe v Secretary of State for Education (Rev1)

Sutcliffe v Secretary of State for Education (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 1878 (Admin) (25 July 2024)

The High Court dismissed a teacher’s appeal against a prohibition order, holding that deliberate misgendering and comments about homosexuality breached professional standards.

• Teacher misconduct
• Freedom of religion
• Freedom of expression
• Gender identity in schools
• Safeguarding children
• Professional standards for teachers

Read case analysis

Z (A Child) (Long-Term Fostering or Adoption), Re

Z (A Child) (Long-Term Fostering or Adoption), Re [2024] EWFC 148 (B) (21 June 2024)

The court granted a final care order and placement order for Z, finding adoption necessary for his welfare and dispensing with parental consent.

• Care orders
• Placement orders
• Adoption
• Parental responsibility
• Safeguarding children
• Risk assessment

Read case analysis

AK, R (On the Application Of) v Westminster City Council

AK, R (On the Application Of) v Westminster City Council [2024] EWHC 769 (Admin) (05 April 2024)

Westminster’s housing allocation policy was found indirectly discriminatory against women fleeing violence and in breach of the PSED. The council must reconsider AK’s application.

• Indirect discrimination
• Public sector equality duty
• Housing allocation
• Safeguarding children
• Domestic abuse
• Reciprocal transfers

Read case analysis