Barristers Michael Jones KC of Deans Court Chambers and Matthew Carey of St John’s Buildings appeared pro bono in the Court of Appeal in a case concerning a grandmother’s wish to be allowed to look after three of her young grandchildren.
Advocate were approached by a grandmother who wanted to appeal against a decision by the local authority to refuse a further assessment of her suitability as a carer for the children. Being without means to fund the appeal herself, we were able to match her with expert family barristers, who generously agreed to assist.
In a move which lent additional urgency to the case, the local authority proceeded to take steps to place the children for adoption following the making of care and placement orders, despite knowing that an appeal was pending.
The appeal was successful and the care and placement orders were set aside by consent, with the matter remitted to the Family Court for a rehearing.
The Court of Appeal’s judgment has provided important guidance for local authorities designed to prevent scenarios like this from occurring again.
At the final hearing, the grandmother had made an application for further assessment to be a carer for the children. However, this decision was refused, despite the fact that she had previously cared for three of the children and had been positively assessed as a special guardian.
Two grounds of appeal were put forward on the grandmother’s behalf in the Court of Appeal:
(1) The judge at the initial hearing was wrong to refuse the grandmother’s application for further assessment as a carer on the basis of the information available to him and in the context of her having been previously subject to a positive assessment as Special Guardian.
(2) In refusing to allow further assessment of the grandmother, the judge did not have the further evidence necessary to allow him to fully undertake the appropriate welfare balancing exercise when considering the local authority’s application for care and placement orders.
Until the evening prior to the appeal hearing, both the local authority and the Guardian had opposed the appeal. However, there was then a last-minute change of position and the Court was informed that neither the Guardian, nor the local authority, opposed the appeal brought on behalf of the grandmother or the appeals brought on behalf of the parents. The local authority and the Guardian both conceded that it was appropriate for an Independent Social Worker to be instructed to assess her ability as a carer for three of the children, and that the matter be remitted for case management before a different judge.
In his judgment, Lord Justice Baker said that the local authority had taken “inappropriate steps”, namely to proceed with the farewell visit between the children and the parents, knowing that an application for permission to appeal against the placement order was pending. The harm that this could cause to the children’s wellbeing was serious, and would involve both distress and confusion.
Lord Justice Baker described the decision of the local authority to arrange a farewell visit as a “grave error”, with the children now needing further support to come to terms with this. In his judgment therefore, Lord Justice Baker outlined a number of key steps that can be taken to avoid risk of such harm in similar cases in future, which can be read here.
We would like to thank both Michael and Matthew for all their assistance on this case, which has highlighted many important lessons for local authorities and other parties to take on board when handling such cases. Reflecting on his experience working on this case, Michael said:
“This was a really great case to work on for a really pleasant and committed grandmother who had not been given a fair opportunity for further assessment as a carer for her grandchildren. It was a pleasure to work with Advocate case workers and with my junior, Matthew, and we obtained a fantastic result (and the right result) for our client.”
Read more of Advocate’s applicant stories.