Orders in family proceedings - Interim care order

Re N-C (children) (interim care order): Court of Appeal, Civil Division (Lords Justice Black, Thorpe): 10 August 2011

The instant case concerned a large Slovakian family for which there were on going care proceedings concerning the children. Older children had been previously put into care.

The last born child (G) was approximately 18 months old at the time of the proceedings and remained with the mother and father following the birth. Whilst in foster care, one of the older children made allegations of sexual abuse against the father. That was a new allegation, as previously the allegations had concerned neglect and emotional abuse. That new allegation resulted in the removal of G from the care of the mother. In due course, the father left the house and returned to Slovakia. The mother therefore questioned the need for G's removal from her care and sought her return.

A hearing was convened and on that occasion the judge made an order which recorded the parents together seeking the return of the G to the mother on that basis that the father had moved out. The judge rejected that application.

In so doing he made it clear that the removal of such a young child from its birth mother was extreme especially given the father's undertaking to move out, however he also noted that he was venturing into unknown territory and therefore the safest course, as a holding exercise, was to remove G and reinterview the older children. The mother sought the immediate return of G or significantly increased contact.

An order was made taking steps to ensure that possibility whilst acknowledging the difficulties persisting in the case. The judge declined to order the return of the child to the mother and having taken into account the advice of the local authority that the mother might leave the jurisdiction. The mother appealed.

The mother submitted, inter alia, that the judge had been one sided in his reasoning. The appeal would be dismissed.

In the instant case, the judge had not erred in his reasoning. When considering the results of the three hearings together, it was clear that the judge had been aware that the removal was draconian, but that for the short term it was the safest course. Due respect was to be given to the discretions exercised by a judge during interim proceedings.

Jane Crowley QC and Yvonne Healing (instructed by Butcher and Barlow) for the mother. Frances Oldham QC and Carolyn Bland (instructed by the local authority) for the local authority.