header-logo header-logo

Family proceedings

22 September 2017
Issue: 6672 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Family , In Court
printer mail-detail

Re A and others (children) (care orders: care plans) [2017] All ER (D) 41 (Sep), [2017] Lexis Citation 285

None of the final care plans proposed by the local authority for five children could be approved. The Family Court held that, before they could be approved, it was important to know whether the present foster carers were willing to offer a long-term home either for the older four children or just for the eldest child and that before the plans to separate the older four children could be properly evaluated, there needed to be an expert assessment of the children by an appropriately experienced child psychologist.

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

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

A good book, a glass of chilled Albarino, and being creative for pleasure help Liz McGrath balance the rigours of complex bundles and being Head of Chambers

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Firm welcomes director in its financial services financial regulatory team

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Partner appointment in firm’s equity capital markets team

NEWS

Walkers and runners will take in some of London’s finest views at the 16th annual charity event

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Could the Labour government usher in a new era for digital assets, ask Keith Oliver, head of international, and Amalia Neenan FitzGerald, associate, Peters & Peters, in this week’s NLJ

An extra bit is being added to case citations to show the pecking order of the judges concerned. Former district judge Stephen Gold has the details, in his ‘Civil way’ column in this week’s NLJ

The Labour government’s position on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is not yet clear

back-to-top-scroll