header-logo header-logo

Assessment matters

08 December 2017 / David Burrows
Issue: 7773 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail
nlj_7773_burrows

David Burrows presents a master class in child understanding & capacity

  • Assessment of a child’s understanding is complementary to law in relation to understanding under Mental Capacity Act 2005.
  • Gillick remains the basis for assessment of understanding.
  • Understanding is issue-specific: it must be tested according to the issue in hand and with all age-appropriate information available.

In Re S (Child as Parent: Adoption: Consent) [2017] EWHC 2729 (Fam) Cobb J sets out the legal framework for professional assessment of understanding of the process and effect of adoption for a mother, S, who is ‘under 16 years of age’. She suffers from ‘developmental delay and learning difficulties’ ([2]). She has not seen her child T whom she wants adopted. ‘Child’ is defined as a person not yet 18 (Children Act 1989 (CA 1989), s 105(1)), though this article is concerned mostly with a child of under 16.

The case is of significance more widely than to capacity and adoption. It reviews the question of understanding and Gillick -competence in children proceedings generally, though

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll