Key Facts
- •Ellie, born February 25, 2023, was removed from her parents' care on February 27, 2023, via an interim care order (ICO).
- •The parents have a history of domestic abuse, violence, substance misuse, and mental health issues.
- •The local authority (LA) sought to maintain the ICO and continued separation.
- •The parents argued the LA's concerns were historic and they had taken steps towards improvement.
- •Ellie was placed with her maternal aunt, supported by her grandmother, and siblings.
- •The court considered whether continued separation was proportionate given the family context.
Legal Principles
An ICO requires reasonable grounds for believing a child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm attributable to parental care.
Children Act 1989, sections 31(2) and 38(2)
'Likely' in this context means a 'real possibility' of significant harm, not necessarily more likely than not.
Re H & Ors (minors) [1995] UKHL 16
For ICOs involving newborn separation, necessity and proportionality are key considerations, demanding a high standard of justification from the LA.
Re C (A Child: Interim Separation) [2019] EWCA Civ 1998
On an ICO application, the court assesses if the LA has a strong case for the threshold, generally relying on written evidence.
FPR 22.7(1)
The court can issue directions under s.38(6) regarding a child's placement, even if it conflicts with the LA's plan, for assessment purposes.
Children Act 1989, section 38(6); Re B (Interim Care Order: Directions) [2002] 1 FLR 545
Outcomes
The ICO was granted.
The court found reasonable grounds for believing Ellie faced a real possibility of significant harm without intervention, and that continued separation with the aunt, grandmother, and siblings was proportionate.
Continued contact between Ellie and her parents, at least four times weekly, was ordered, with initial contact decisions left to the LA's discretion.
To balance the need for protection with maintaining family connection in the specific placement context.
A Case Management Hearing (CMH) was scheduled to expedite proceedings.
To resolve the case efficiently and ensure quick progress considering the seriousness of the order.