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 Havering v R & Ors

The court finds that threshold criteria are met due to the parents' vulnerabilities, substance misuse, lack of engagement, and inability to provide safe and consistent care for Q. Further residential assessment of R is not justified as it would cause delay, is unlikely to be positive, and is not in Q's welfare interests. There are no realistic family or friend placement options. Adoption is the only option that meets Q's immediate and long-term welfare needs. Parental consent to placement order is dispensed with as Q's welfare requires it.

Source excerpt

• Care orders
• Placement orders
• Parental responsibility
• Threshold criteria
• Welfare checklist
• Residential assessment

Read case analysis

A Local Authority v The Mother & Ors

Adoption is the only option that meets both the children’s need for permanence and ongoing sibling contact; long-term foster care cannot provide the same degree of security and belonging. The welfare of D and E requires dispensing with parental consent and making care and placement orders, with sibling contact prioritized in the care plan.

Source excerpt

• Care orders
• Placement orders
• Adoption
• Long-term foster care
• Sibling contact
• Parental consent

Read case analysis

M v F & Anor

M v F & Anor [2026] EWFC 106 (B) (13 May 2026)

The Family Court extended protective orders for a nearly 17-year-old child, continued indirect-only contact with the father, and made a section 91(14) order.

• Child arrangements
• Prohibited steps order
• Non-molestation order
• Section 91(14) order
• Welfare checklist
• Domestic abuse

Read case analysis

AB v BB

Family court judgment on child arrangements after findings that the father repeatedly viewed prohibited child sexual abuse images, with differing contact orders for each child.

• Child arrangements
• Risk assessment
• Contact orders
• Child sexual abuse imagery
• Expert evidence
• Welfare checklist

Read case analysis

AB v BB

AB v BB [2026] EWFC 111 (B) (07 May 2026)

Family court case about child arrangements where the father’s repeated viewing of prohibited child sexual abuse imagery led to supervised contact for DB and gradual unsupervised contact for CB.

• Child arrangements
• Contact orders
• Risk assessment
• Child sexual abuse material
• Expert evidence
• Welfare checklist

Read case analysis

A Child born 2017 – Final Hearing, Re

The father's failure to address or provide evidence regarding his domestic abuse and substance misuse, his lack of insight, and his non-compliance with court orders present ongoing risks to the child. The welfare of the child requires that no direct or indirect contact (other than limited provision of photographs) be ordered, and that a section 91(14) order be made to restrict further applications for five years.

Source excerpt

• Child contact
• Domestic abuse
• Substance misuse
• Section 91(14) children act
• Welfare checklist
• Parental responsibility

Read case analysis

AZ (A Child) (Special Guardianship Order), Re

AZ's welfare will be best met by living with Mr and Mrs B under a Special Guardianship Order, as they can provide permanence, stability, and trauma-informed therapeutic parenting to meet his individual emotional and educational needs, outweighing the harm of separation from his sibling C and Mr D. The arrangement removes AZ from ongoing risks of parental conflict and statutory intervention, while maintaining meaningful family relationships through flexible contact. No child arrangements order for contact or parental responsibility is necessary or proportionate, as Mr and Mrs B can be trusted…

Source excerpt

• Special guardianship orders
• Care orders
• Welfare checklist
• Parental responsibility
• Sibling separation
• Contact arrangements

Read case analysis

Oxfordshire County Council v M & Ors

The court found threshold met in chronic neglect proceedings, granted final care orders for three children, and refused F’s application for a further ISW assessment.

• Care orders
• Neglect
• Parenting assessment
• Welfare checklist
• Contact arrangements
• Care-orders

Read case analysis

Oxfordshire County Council v M & Ors

Oxfordshire County Council v M & Ors [2026] EWFC 92 (B) (27 April 2026)

Care proceedings involving chronic neglect. The court made final care orders for three children, refused a further assessment of the father, and endorsed long-term foster care.

• Care orders
• Threshold criteria
• Parenting assessment
• Welfare checklist
• Expert evidence
• Contact arrangements

Read case analysis