Re C & Ors (Care Proceedings: Adequacy of Reasons)
[2023] EWCA Civ 334
J & Ors (Children: Interim Removal), Re
3 November 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 1266
Court of Appeal
A judge wrongly took three kids from their dad and put them in foster care. A higher court said the judge didn't think enough about how good a dad he was or how bad it would be for the kids to be taken away. The higher court sent the kids back to their dad with rules to follow.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against interim care orders for three children (twin girls aged 8 and a younger sister aged 6).
- •Mother has a history of substance abuse, mental health problems, and criminal convictions; older children were previously removed from her care.
- •Father also has other children and had an on-off relationship with the mother.
- •Children initially placed with father, then returned to mother, later back with father due to concerns.
- •District Judge ordered increased contact between mother and children.
- •Mother made allegations of abuse against father, denied by father and not corroborated.
- •Local authority applied for interim care orders due to concerns about children's emotional wellbeing and parents' non-compliance with contact arrangements.
- •Judge granted interim care orders, placing children in foster care.
- •Father appealed, arguing factual errors, improper welfare checklist analysis, lack of proportionality, and failure to consider less interventionist options.
Legal Principles
Interim care orders should only be made to address matters that cannot await the final hearing and must be necessary and proportionate.
Re C (A Child) (Interim Separation) [2019] EWCA Civ 1998
The removal of a child from a parent interferes with their right to respect for family life under Article 8 ECHR and requires a high standard of justification.
Re C (A Child) (Interim Separation) [2019] EWCA Civ 1998
The court should adopt the least interventionist course consistent with safeguarding the children's safety and welfare.
Re H-W (Children) [2022] UKSC 17
The court must conduct a proper welfare checklist analysis under s.1(3) Children Act 1989.
Children Act 1989
“Immediate risk of serious harm” is not the test for interim removal.
Re L-A (Children) [2009] EWCA Civ 822
Unless the child’s safety and welfare require their immediate removal, the court should always allow an unsuccessful party the opportunity to apply to the appellate court.
Re N (Children: Interim Order/Stay) [2020] EWCA Civ 1070
Outcomes
Appeal allowed; interim care order set aside; children returned to father's care.
Judge failed to properly apply the test for immediate removal, overlooking positive evidence of father's care, failing to analyze the risk of harm from removal, and not adequately considering less interventionist options.
Interim supervision order made with a written agreement between parents and local authority.
To ensure the children's safety while allowing them to remain with their father, addressing the issues that led to the interim care order.