E (A Child) (Care and Placement Orders)
[2023] EWCA Civ 721
A Local Authority v A & Ors
23 January 2023
[2023] EWFC 34 (B)
Family Court
A court case about six kids was taking too long. A judge ordered extra assessments, even though there were already reports. A higher court said the extra assessments weren't needed and sped things up.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against District Judge's case management decisions in care proceedings involving six children.
- •Guardian appealed decisions to order a further PAMS assessment of the mother, adjourn the mother's application for psychological assessment of child C, and direct an intermediary assessment of the mother.
- •Mother has extremely low cognitive ability and history of cannabis use, neglect, and domestic violence.
- •Children were initially subject to interim care orders, with some children returned to mother's care later.
- •Local Authority's care plan changed from rehabilitation to adoption for some children.
- •Appeal regarding intermediary assessment dismissed due to newly discovered email.
- •Significant delay in proceedings (74 weeks at time of appeal).
Legal Principles
Appeals against case management decisions are limited to review; appeal allowed only if decision was wrong or outside generous ambit of reasonable disagreement.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, rule 30.12(1) and (3); Re TG [2013] EWCA Civ 5
Court must further overriding objective to deal with cases justly, expeditiously, and fairly, proportionately to issues, ensuring equal footing and saving expense.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, rule 1.2
Court may permit expert evidence only if necessary to resolve proceedings justly, considering welfare impact, available evidence, cost, and timetable.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, Part 25.4; Children and Families Act 2014, section 13
Agency Decision Maker must consider all evidence independently, not merely rubber-stamp parenting assessment recommendations.
T (A Child) [2018] EWCA Civ 2018
No requirement in Adoption Agency Regulations 2005 for negative parenting assessment for adoption; assessment of parenting capacity is required, but not a formal assessment with negative conclusion.
Adoption Agency Regulations 2005, Regulation 17
Delay in care proceedings prejudices child welfare; 26-week timescale aims to expedite proceedings.
Children Act 1989, section 1(2); Children and Families Act 2014, section 32; Family Justice Review
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part: Further PAMS assessment ordered by District Judge overturned.
Further assessment deemed unnecessary given existing positive PAMS assessment, subsequent monitoring of mother's parenting, and availability of other evidence. It caused undue delay prejudicial to children's welfare and was disproportionate.
Mother's application for psychological assessment of child C dismissed.
Insufficient evidence to suggest necessity of assessment; child's upcoming appointment with CAMHS provides sufficient avenue for assessment.
New case management decisions made to expedite proceedings.
To ensure just and timely resolution, reallocate case, set new deadlines for evidence filing, include placement application directions, and schedule a final hearing.