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
Wood, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 480 (17 April 2026)
The Court of Appeal held that David Wood was unfit to stand trial due to severe cognitive impairment and speech difficulties, quashed his conviction, and ordered an absolute discharge.
The Court of Appeal held that David Wood was unfit to stand trial in 2019, quashed his arson conviction, substituted disability findings, and ordered an absolute discharge.
GCC v M & Ors [2026] EWFC 94 (B) (10 April 2026)
The Family Court made care orders for two young children to remain at home with their mother, finding the orders necessary and proportionate despite the children’s attachment and progress.
Care proceedings about an infant’s skull fracture and subdural bleed. The court found non-accidental injury, could not identify a single perpetrator, and made welfare orders.
The threshold for significant harm under s.31(2) Children Act 1989 is met due to parental substance misuse, mental health issues, domestic abuse, neglectful parenting, unsafe home conditions, and failure to engage with professionals. Welfare analysis supports care orders for X and W with foster placement, and supervision/child arrangements orders for Z and Y to live with Mr A. Section 91(14) order is justified to prevent further disruptive applications for 12 months due to ongoing risk of harm and lack of parental insight.
Source excerpt
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.
A & B (Children) (Placement with parent or SGO), Re [2026] EWFC 19 (B) (30 January 2026)
Family Court decision on child placement, resolving a domestic abuse and substance misuse dispute. The judge kept the children with their father under supervision.
Threshold criteria for care orders are met for all children due to findings of physical abuse, neglect, domestic abuse, and inability of parents to consistently meet needs. Care orders for Child D, Child E, and Child F, and a supervision order for Child C, are necessary and proportionate to safeguard welfare. Placement with parents or maternal uncle is not viable due to risk of harm, lack of insight, and inability to provide consistent care. Children's wishes and feelings considered but outweighed by welfare concerns.
Source excerpt
London Borough of Ealing v Ella & Anor [2026] EWFC 14 (15 January 2026)
The court found threshold crossed at the start of proceedings but held Amy should remain with her mother under a 12-month supervision order, not move to special guardianship.
The evidence of sustained positive change by the mother, absence of dependency, and strong bond with the child outweighs the risks posed by previous substance misuse and domestic abuse; severance of family life through adoption is not justified; a supervision order supporting return to mother's care is proportionate and meets the child's welfare needs.
Source excerpt
Explore more
