England and Wales Family Court Decisions (other Judges)

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE                                               Case No: NE14C00018  

FAMILY DIVISION

SITTING IN NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE

            The Law Courts

The Quayside

Newcastle-upon-Tyne

NE1 3LA

 

IN THE MATTER OF THE CHILDREN ACT 1989

AND IN THE MATTER OF: K ( CHILDREN)

Monday, 5^th January 2015

 

Before:

 

HER HONOUR JUDGE MOIR

Sitting as a Judge of the High Court

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Re: K (Children)

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Counsel for the Local Authority: Not known

Counsel for the Mother: Not known

Counsel for the Father: Not known

Counsel for the Child: Not known

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

 

APPROVED JUDGMENT

 

 

 

Transcribed from the Official Tape Recording by

Apple Transcription Limited

Suite 204, Kingfisher Business Centre, Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire BB4 8ES

Telephone: 0845 604 5642 – Fax: 01706 870838

1.                  THE JUDGE:  As far as the major issues which this court has been asked to consider, the applicant applied for care orders in respect of both A, who was born on 24^th January of 1998 and so she is very nearly 17, and B, who was born on 10^th September of 2010, so she is 4 years and some months. 

2.                  As far as A is concerned, the respondent father in these proceedings is not the father of A, he is the father of B.  The respondent mother, of course, is A’s mother.  She has accepted the threshold has been made out, accepted the position that A is well placed in foster care and, indeed, A’s own wishes are to continue within that placement.  I do not need to go through the factual background of why we have reached this position.  Thus there is agreement as to the framework for A in that a care order will safeguard and promote her welfare.  The threshold is made out.  A herself accepts the making of a care order and so does her mother.  The issue in relation to contact has been discussed and agreed and, therefore, the court is in a position to make the order in respect of A that the Local Authority seeks. 

3.                  The Local Authority do not pursue a care order in respect of B.  B remains living with her mother.  The Local Authority and guardian are satisfied that the care that M affords to B is satisfactory and it is also agreed by the respondent father.  The issue of contact between A and B has been considered and agreed.  B will participate in the contact which M has with A. 

4.                  Thus contact by F is the issue which the court must consider and whether making an order in respect of this contact issue is necessary and appropriate.  It is agreed that there should be progress towards contact and that contact should take place.  There are a number of matters which need consideration prior to contact taking place, namely that the Local Authority should carry out work with B.  There has been no contact between B and her father for some two and a half years.  The guardian has suggested also that participation on a domestic abusers programme is appropriate.  It seems that there is a real possibility that the work has already been done in this regard following upon the criminal proceedings.  Whether any further work is needed remains subject to confirmation through the providers of the domestic abuse course and probation to discuss exactly what it is that has been undertaken and is needed and whether any further work should be undertaken and completed. 

5.                  The Local Authority seek a supervision order in relation to B, bearing in mind the difficulties that there are in the relationship between the parents, the problems that there have been in relation to A and the recognition that M and B would benefit from the Local Authority continuing to be involved upon a statutory basis.  The threshold is made out.  M accepts that a supervision order is appropriate and the court takes the view that it is proportionate. 

6.                  The Local Authority, therefore, will remain involved for twelve months.  They will be able to assist in relation to contact, but they will not have parental responsibility.  Therefore, the issue of contact will be in the hands of the parents and if they cannot agree about contact, then, sadly, it will be the court that has to make a decision.  It will be most unfortunate if there needs to be a return to court, not least because the parties will not be able to call upon their legal advisers as the proceedings will be private law proceedings and no public funding will be made available to litigate the matter.  It is to be hoped, of course, that the other element that the guardian has suggested, namely the separated parents’ information programme, which both parents have agreed to undertake, will assist both parties in understanding the issues and difficulties that the other may have in relation to contact and the importance to B of having the opportunity to have a relationship with both of her parents. 

7.                  It is not disputed by F that presently contact, when it starts, should be supervised.  B is still young, it is two and a half years since any contact took place and the contact will have to be monitored, assessed and future contact arranged upon the basis of what information there is available as to how contact between B and her father is progressing and meeting B’s needs.  The Local Authority for the twelve-month period will be in a position to have an independent view of what is happening but it cannot and should not be their decision in absence of the agreement of the parents as to whether contact continues to be supervised or not and it is that latter problem which has occupied time for discussion and consideration. 

8.                  I am very well aware that M has placed reliance upon what the guardian has set out in her report and the advice that she has been receiving from her legal advisers and I do not underestimate the concerns that she has in relation to the welfare of her daughter when she has her own experiences to deal with.  The violence between the parents is a fact in that the father pleaded guilty to a violent offence in December of 2012.  The father’s account and the mother’s account of what actually occurred are very different.  The mother’s account details a much more serious incident than the father would accept.  The court has not heard evidence or made a determination as to which account is accurate.  It is within the jurisdiction of the court to do so, but in fact determining that issue today would not actually assist very greatly in determining the issue of supervision or the question as to how long supervision should continue, whether for a short time or indefinitely.  There has not been at any stage any allegation that the father’s behaviour with his daughter was inappropriate or violent but, of course, M bases her views upon his behaviour to her, which is understandable.  The trust is not there.

9.                  The position therefore is, as I have indicated, contact will be supervised.  I do not know for how long that will be necessary.  Even hearing evidence today will not assist me in relation to that.  What a court deciding whether supervision should be for a short or longer period of time needs to know is how B reacts to contact, how her father deals with contact and what effect the contact has upon M’s views in respect of contact.  These are all unknown factors.  However, as the Local Authority are going to continue to be involved, there is a mechanism and process which will be able to provide an independent view of how contact is affecting B.  In considering contact, it is B’s welfare that is my paramount concern.  If contact is progressing well and benefiting B and the risk assessment is that contact with her father is in her interests and any risks are low, then it is not in B’s interests for contact to be supervised indefinitely.  Supervised contact is not a natural situation for father and daughter and therefore, if contact does not need to be supervised, it should not be supervised. 

10.              Therefore, while I am of the view that contact presently should be supervised and it may be it will need to be supervised for some time, if the Local Authority reach the conclusion that continuing supervision of contact is not necessary and does not serve B’s interests, then no doubt they will discuss that with both parents.  If the parents cannot agree that contact should become unsupervised in pursuance of the Local Authority recommendation, then the matter will have to come before the court.  The mechanism to enable that to happen will have to be an application to the court.  As the Local Authority do not have parental responsibility and will not have parental responsibility, it will be an application that will have to be brought by one of the parents.  If the Local Authority have reached the conclusion that contact no longer needs to be supervised, then it seems to me that the parent who is saying that the Local Authority should continue to supervise must be the parent who makes the application to the court. 

11.              The contact is being supervised by agreement at the outset.  Both parents agree that it should be supervised.  If that situation no longer continues and either parent, upon the assistance and advice of the Local Authority, withdraws the agreement (so really I am looking at the fact that the Local Authority take the view that B’s welfare no longer requires supervision), if the father, therefore, withdraws his agreement to continuing supervised contact, then the mother needs to come to the court for the court to order that it should continue to be supervised.  I hope that situation does not arise and that there can be agreement if it becomes appropriate for contact to be unsupervised. 

12.              However, there is an alternative possibility as well and that is that the Local Authority continue to be of the view that it remains necessary for it to be supervised.  If that is the position and the father does not accept that position, then it will be for him to make the application to the court.  I am not in any way imposing on the Local Authority a responsibility to make an application to the court or for them to make a decision which is determinative.  What they are doing is assisting, befriending and monitoring the situation for B.  They are looking at what is in B’s best interests, what is for her welfare, as they are required to do.  In exercising their responsibilities under the supervision order, if their views are not accepted by either of the parents, then it is for the parent that does not accept their views to make the application to the court. 

13.              So the order that the court will make in relation to supervision is that it should be reasonable contact, which it is agreed should be supervised as long as the interests of B require such supervision.

[Judgment ends]