header-logo header-logo

Child law update

30 October 2009 / Dorothea Gartland
Issue: 7391 / Categories: Features , Child law
printer mail-detail

Dorothea Gartland analyses the concept of significant harm

The decision of the Court of Appeal in MA, SA, HA (Children by their Childrens’ Guardian) v MA, HA & The City and Council of Swansea [2009] EWCA Civ 853, [2009] All ER (D) 354 (Jul) will be of particular interest to practitioners in regard to the concept of significant harm under the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989).

As Ward LJ explains in his judgment: “This is, as I understand it, the first time this Court has had to consider when the dividing line between harm and significant harm is established.” The majority decision was to dismiss the appeal by the children’s guardian against the findings of the trial judge that the threshold had not been crossed in care proceedings and the subsequent dismissal of the care proceedings.

The facts

The parents were both from Pakistan and had arrived in the UK and sought asylum. Their claims had been refused.

While in the UK, the mother had three children and at the time of the appeal

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll