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.
This judgment was delivered in private. The Judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that, irrespective of what is contained in the judgment, in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.
Miss V. Burgess , Counsel, instructed by Hepburn Delaney Solicitor for the 2 nd Respondent
The names of the children and the adult parties in this judgment have been anonymised, pursuant to the Practice Guidance of the President of the Family Division issued in December 2018 having regard to the implications for the children of placing personal details and information in the public domain. The anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.
The children with whom the Court is concerned are age 2 and 1 years respectively. Child C is the oldest and Child D is the youngest. Their mother (�M�) is the First Respondent in the proceedings. Their father (�F�) is the Second Respondent.
The Local Authority�s applications for Care and Placement Orders are supported by the Children's Guardian.
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.