James Dove responded successfully to an appeal of an interim care order


12th Dec 2017 | News


James Dove responded successfully to an appeal of an interim care order in BJ (a child) [2017] CA (Civ Div) before Lord Justices McFarlane, Moylan and Peter Jackson on behalf of a local authority.

The court upheld the decision of HHJ Corbett to separate a mother from her baby at a residential assessment centre. The court confirmed that the test for removal is as set out by Lord Justice Thorpe in Re H [2002] EWCA Civ 1932:

Paragraph 39. “…..In my judgment, the arts 6 and 8 rights of the parents required the judge to abstain from premature determination of their case for the future beyond the final fixture, unless the welfare of the child demanded it. In effect, since removal from these lifelong parents to foster parents would be deeply traumatic for the child, and of course open to further upset should the parents’ case ultimately succeed, that separation was only to be contemplated if B’s safety demanded immediate separation.” 

McFarlane LJ confirmed that ‘immediate’ was an important part of the test. The question remains, what is the situation at the time of the hearing? Does a child need to be immediately separated from their carer or not?


Do you have a similar case?

If you would like some help or advice, talk about a similar matter, call our clerks on 020 7353 6961.

Author

Recent

Adam Kayani shortlisted for Young Pro Bono Barrister of the Year

Harcourt Chambers is delighted to announce that Adam Kayani has been shortlisted for Young Pro Bono Barrister of the...

Emily Rayner appointed as Deputy District Judge

Harcourt Chambers are pleased to announce that Emily Rayner has been appointed Deputy District Judge on the South...

Harcourt Chambers ranked as a top tier set by the Legal 500

We are delighted to have been ranked as a top tier set in The Legal 500 where Harcourt is described as ‘an excellent...

Search