DM v EM [2017] NIFam 4 (21 February 2017)

DM v EM [2017] NIFam 4 (21 February 2017)

The trial judge was entitled to find that DM posed a risk to NM based on past convictions, lack of insight, absence of a risk management plan, and failure to cooperate with statutory agencies. The care order was justified as the risk could not be safely managed within the family, and the welfare of the child required care outside the parental home.

Citation
[2017] NIFam 4
Parties
Appellant: DM; Respondent: EM; Respondent: A Health and Social Care Trust
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
21 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Family Care Centre Decision
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Care Order, Risk of Sexual Harm, Threshold Criteria, Risk Management, Parental Capacity, Child Welfare

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DM

Appellant

EM

Respondent

A Health and Social Care Trust

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Family Care Centre Decision

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in law in making a care order based on risk of sexual harm
  2. 2 Whether the evidence supported the finding that DM posed a real sexual risk to his daughter
  3. 3 Whether the judge properly considered the parents' engagement and capacity to manage risk

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to find that DM posed a risk to NM based on past convictions, lack of insight, absence of a risk management plan, and failure to cooperate with statutory agencies. The care order was justified as the risk could not be safely managed within the family, and the welfare of the child required care outside the parental home.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • care order for NM upheld
  • child to remain in care outside parental home