High Court judge loses temper as councils battle to avoid paying for sick boy

Mr Justice Hedley has described how the behaviour of two warring local authorities determined to avoid responsibility for a sick boy forced him to adjourn a hearing because he no longer trusted himself to express himself in a 'temperate manner'.

Giving judgment in Mr and Mrs O v Orkney Island Council [2009] EWHC 3171 (Fam), Hedley J said: 'The local authorities were present at court not to assist '“ in fairness they did not even make a pretence at that '“ but to obtain legal authority to distance themselves from responsibility for this child.

'I confess that as I listened to these matters, disbelief was not the only thought or emotion that I experienced. Indeed I found it necessary to adjourn briefly so as to ensure that no wholly improper judicial observations escaped my lips.

'This judgment has been reserved not because the issues are difficult (they are not) but because I did not trust myself to express my views in a temperate manner.

'I have always had a high regard for the contribution that social workers make to the family justice system but if in fact we have reached a stage where budget needs trump welfare then we all need to know.'

I, now aged six, was born with a serious heart disorder in the Orkney Islands, which immediately required major surgery at Birmingham Children's Hospital.

He was taken into care when he was only five months old. Mr and Mrs O, a professional couple living in Cambridgeshire, offered to look after him. Mrs O's cousin is I's grandmother. Orkney Islands Council (OIC) agreed that they should be foster carers.

'The position of OIC seems to be that in pursuance of their statutory duties they placed I with Mr and Mrs O as kinship foster carers,' Hedley J said.

'Once, however, sufficient time had elapsed for him to become effectively habitually resident in England and despite the commitments given apparently through a responsible officer, they have terminated his status as a looked after child, and disclaimed all further responsibility for him.

'If this position is justifiable legally (as to which I am not convinced) it is of course a huge triumph for OIC's budget manager but a complete catastrophe for any foster parent unwise enough to rely on the word of this local authority.

'But need the foster parents have worried for could they not have turned to CCC [Cambridgeshire County Council] in whose area they reside? In fact CCC have throughout adamantly refused to become involved, maintaining that the legal obligations are those of OIC and not theirs and that Mr and Mrs O should expend their energies in the pursuit of OIC.'

Mr Justice Hedley ruled that CCC should prepare the report necessary for Mr and Mrs O's application for a special guardianship order to succeed.

He directed that copies of the judgment were sent to Ed Balls, secretary of state for children and families and the secretary of state for Scotland for transmission to the relevant minister in the Scottish executive.

'I give this direction with no punitive motive in mind as I believe that each authority has made the decisions it has with a view to the protection of a finite budget. They cannot be criticised for such a step but the consequence for the foster parents of a sick child with special needs are cataclysmic.'

He added: 'I wish to pay tribute to Mr and Mrs O for their care for I and for their steadfastness through all these difficulties not of their making. I dare to think that most citizens of this state would like to see them duly supported as they believed that they would be. I dare to think that many citizens of this state will feel a touch of shame that things could work out as they appear to have done in this case.'