On 29 January 2025, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in The Father v Worcestershire County Council, dismissing the father's appeal against the care order placing his children in foster care. The father had sought a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the care order was made without jurisdiction and that his children were unlawfully detained. The Court of Appeal had previously dismissed his application, stating that the correct process was to challenge the care order through the procedures outlined in the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) and the Family Procedure Rules, rather than through habeas corpus. The Supreme Court agreed, emphasising that the children were not detained but living in a domestic setting typical for their age. The judgment underscores the importance of following established legal procedures for challenging care orders, and highlights the limited scope of habeas corpus in such family law matters. Mark Blundell, Barrister at 1 GC Family Law, comments on the judgment.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in with ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû or register for a free trial
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN CONTINUE READING GET A QUOTE
To read the full news article, register for a free Lexis+ trial
**Trials are provided to all ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
* denotes a required field
Designation of local authorities for the purposes of care and supervision ordersThis Practice Note aims to provide guidance on the often controversial issue of local authority designation for the purposes of section 31 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989). In particular, it will focus on:•the
Tattoos, sunbeds and minorsTattooing of minorsIt is an offence to tattoo a person under the age of 18 except where the tattoo is performed for medical reasons by a qualified medical practitioner or by a person working under his direction. However, it is a defence for a person charged to show that at
Are the powers of a recovery order in children's care proceedings unlimited or can a child only be recovered once per order?Grounds for applying for a recovery order in care proceedingsSection 50 of Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989)Section 50(2) of ChA 1989 specifies that a recovery order under this
Public funding in care proceedingsPublic funding in care proceedings is provided for parties by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) who are an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice (MOJ).Public funding involves the relevant party’s solicitor applying for and being granted by the LAA, a legal aid
0330 161 1234