Court of Appeal orders rehearing in child risk assessment case

3 Feb 2025Court Report

Court of Appeal remits child risk assessment case for rehearing due to incomplete risk evaluation

Introduction

The Court of Appeal has ordered a rehearing in the case concerning the welfare of two children, O and Y, after finding that the initial risk assessment was incomplete. The case, which originated from the Family Court at Canterbury, involved concerns about the risk posed by Mr F, the father of Y, due to his history of violence.

Background

O and Y, aged five and one respectively, had been living with their mother, who provided excellent care. However, concerns arose regarding Mr F's potential risk to the children. The local authority sought a supervision order to protect the children, leading to the separation of O and Y from their mother and placement with their respective father and maternal grandfather.

The Family Court's Decision

The Family Court, presided over by Her Honour Judge Sarah Davies, concluded that the risk from Mr F was too significant, resulting in O living with her father and Y with his maternal grandfather. The mother was granted significant contact with both children, but the decision to separate the children was contested.

Appeal and Grounds

The mother appealed the decision, arguing that the risk assessment was incomplete and that key findings of fact were missing. The Court of Appeal, led by Lord Justice Peter Jackson, found merit in these arguments, particularly noting the lack of a clear finding on whether the mother had breached her undertakings regarding Mr F.

Risk Assessment Issues

The Court of Appeal emphasised the importance of a thorough risk assessment, highlighting the need to consider the settings and circumstances under which Mr F could pose a threat. The judgment noted that the Family Court's assessment did not adequately address protective measures that could mitigate the risk.

Decision to Remit

Given the incomplete risk assessment, the Court of Appeal decided to remit the case for a fresh decision. The pre-existing arrangements, where the children lived with their mother, were restored pending the rehearing.

Interim Arrangements

The Court of Appeal ordered interim supervision to ensure Mr F remained away from the children, except for supervised contact with Y. The decision underscored the need for careful consideration of the children's welfare and justice in such sensitive cases.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal's decision highlights the complexities involved in child welfare cases, especially when balancing risk assessments with the children's best interests. The rehearing will provide an opportunity for a more comprehensive evaluation of the risks and protective measures.