Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce
and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email
emma.reitano@lexisnexis.co.uk.
Approach when a local authority seeks permission to withdraw application for care order
© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.
Family analysis: Maud Davis partner at TV Edwards LLP says the judgment in A local authority v A mother and others [2017] EWHC 3741 (Fam) [2017] All ER (D) 146 (Dec) makes it clear that the risk of significant harm has to be established on the basis of evidence and not ‘assumptions or speculation on future behaviour’.
What are the practical implications of the judgment?
The judgment makes it clear that however startling or unusual the facts of the case the basic principles apply. So even though there was evidence of terrorist connections (in the form of convictions against the father and the fact that he was subject of a terrorist prevention and investigation measure (TPIM)) the court still had to look at the evidence of significant harm—or risk of significant harm—to the children in the care of their parents (in line with the threshold criteria set out in s 31 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989)). The risk of significant harm has to be established on the basis of evidence and not ‘assumptions or speculation...
Read the full article here.
