Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

Coventry City Council v XX & Ors

[2024] EWFC 249 (B)
A baby girl was taken from her parents at birth because of concerns about her safety. Some experts thought the parents could care for her with support, but others thought adoption was best. The judge listened to everyone and decided adoption was the safest option for the baby, even though it was hard for the parents.

Key Facts

  • Z, born November 5, 2023, was removed from parents XX and YY's care at birth due to safety concerns.
  • Father YY has a history of trauma, a conviction for controlling and coercive behaviour, and maintained contact with a man imprisoned for raping his sister.
  • Mother XX has borderline intellectual functioning and significant mental health challenges.
  • Conflicting expert opinions exist: independent social worker Ms Williams believes parents can care for Z with support, while other professionals, including a forensic psychologist, believe adoption is necessary.
  • The court heard evidence from various professionals, the parents, and the guardian.

Legal Principles

In care proceedings, the child's welfare is paramount.

Children Act 1989, section 1(1)

The burden of proof lies with the local authority to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the threshold for care orders is met.

Re L and M (Children) [2013] EWHC 1569 (Fam)

The court must consider all realistic options and undertake a holistic welfare evaluation, weighing the pros and cons of each.

Re B-S (Adoption: Application of s47(5) [2013] EWCA Civ 1146, Re Y (Care Proceedings: Proportionality Evaluation) [2014] EWCA Civ 1553

The test for severing the parent-child relationship is strict, requiring exceptional circumstances and overriding welfare needs.

Re B (A Child) [2013] UKSC 33

Society must tolerate diverse parenting standards, but children must be protected from significant harm.

Re L (Care: Threshold Criteria) [2007] FLR 2050

Outcomes

Care order and placement order for adoption granted.

The court found that the risks to Z's welfare in the parents' care were too significant, despite the parents' love for their child. The conflicting expert opinions were weighed, with the judge prioritizing the evidence of the forensic psychologist and social worker over the independent social worker's assessment. The parents' mental health challenges, the father's history of coercive control, and the lack of a safe and stable home environment were considered.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.