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.
(b) Whether a therapist would be able to commence or complete the work within the proposed 12-week period of rehabilitation
(c) Whether the proposed therapist would agree that the Mother was a suitable candidate for therapy
(f) What the impact of the therapy would be upon the Mother, her relationship with her partner, and crucially upon the child and the Mother�s ability to meet her needs during the rehabilitation period
(g) It was assumed that any therapist would undertake the therapy whilst also updating the care team as to its progress and likely success without having had confirmation of that from a therapist.
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.