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.
[1]������ In order to protect the child who is the subject of these proceedings, nothing must be reported which would serve to identify the child or her parents or any of the parties.�
[2]������ The issue at this stage of the proceedings is whether P who is the mother of an 18 month old child (M) has legal capacity i.e. whether she has the capacity to conduct litigation by instructing a solicitor and counsel, following the proceedings and making decisions on the basis of the evidence and the advice which she receives.�
[3]������ A Trust has applied for a care order in respect of M.� It has done so because of its concerns about the well-being of P who has significant and long established mental health problems.� P and R, the child�s parents, are unmarried but they have a continuing relationship.� R�s parents, the paternal grandparents, are currently the main carers for M who is staying with them on an interim basis while the issues in this case are resolved.
[4]������ On 3 November 2014 Dr Fred Browne, consultant psychiatrist, reported on P.� His extremely detailed and helpful 56 page report covers much ground which it is unnecessary (and impossible) to set out in detail in this judgment.� Some of the areas on which he focused are:
(i)������� The breakdown of the relationship between P�s parents when she was very young.�
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.