header-logo header-logo

05 September 2013
Issue: 7574 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Family

Re G (a child) (care order: proportionality) [2013] EWCA Civ 965, [2013] All ER (D) 375 (Jul)

The authorities had made it clear that, following the process of finding any relevant facts, the court in a public law children case had to first make an evaluation to determine whether the statutory threshold criteria in s 31 of the Children Act 1989 were established with respect to the individual child or children as at the relevant date. If the threshold criteria were established, the final stage of the proceedings involved the court evaluating which set of arrangements for the child’s future care were to be endorsed by the court’s order and the evaluation was conducted by affording paramount consideration to the child’s welfare (the welfare evaluation).

Under s 1 of the Act, when a court determined any question with respect to the upbringing of a child, the court had to treat the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration. A judge could not properly decide that a care order should be made in such circumstances, unless the order was proportionate bearing in mind the requirements of Art 8 of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll