Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
On 3 rd December the Court granted the Minister a care order in relation to Q ("the child") in a short judgment given orally in the child's presence. The Court indicated that it would set out its reasons in a fuller written judgment which we now do.
On 5 th October, 2010, a differently constituted court found that the threshold criteria in Article 22(1) of the Children (Jersey) Law 2002 ("the Law") was met and adjourned to the hearing before this Court the issue of what, if any, order should be made in the child's best interests, with the interim care order remaining in place in the meantime. The judgment of the Court is in the following terms:-
The reason for the adjournment was the need for further work to be undertaken to the care plan, following an unauthorised deviation from that plan on 18 th September, 2010, when the shift leader at F made the decision to permit the child to stay out for tea rather than returning to F prior to Q's collection from there by the mother for overnight contact. The child went missing for a period of a few hours during which time Q engaged in sexual intercourse with a 17 year old male.
Whilst we do not doubt the need to adjourn the hearing for further work to be done on the care plan, we think it was unhelpful for the matter to be adjourned to a differently constituted court. We note the dicta of Baroness Hale in Re B (Care Proceedings:Standard of Proof) (2008) UKHL 35 about the need for continuity of judicial involvement. Although no evidence was heard before the Court on 5 th October, 2010, the matter should have been adjourned to a similarly constituted court, in so far as it was reasonably practical to do so.
The child was raised until 2½ by the mother and the biological father, A. Q has one older and one younger sibling and two older half siblings from the mother's earlier marriage. A is a convicted sex offender, one of whose victims was the child's elder sibling. Following A's departure, the mother lived with C from 2000-2008. He had a serious drinking problem which led to domestic violence. The mother is now married to D and they live in the family home with the child's two siblings and one of the older half siblings.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.