![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> B (Children), Re [2021] EWCA Civ 1221 (13 August 2021) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2021/1221.html Cite as: [2021] EWCA Civ 1221 |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable PDF version]
[Help]
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT
HHJ Wood
NE21C00257
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE BEAN
and
LADY JUSTICE KING
____________________
The Mother |
Appellant |
|
- and - |
||
Northumberland County Council |
1st Respondent |
|
B (Children) |
2nd Respondent |
____________________
Wollens) for the Appellant
Mr Frankie Shama (Instructed by Northumberland County Council) for the Local Authority
Ms Susan Boothroyd (Instructed by Richard Reed Solicitors) for B (Children)
Hearing date: 4 August 2021
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Macur LJ:
Introduction:
Proceedings in the Court at first instance
The Judgement under review
"22. In weighing all these factors together, I am not satisfied that this is an exceptional case. I am not satisfied that the risk in this instance is of such an order that it cannot be managed, and appropriate measures put in place. In the circumstances, for the reasons I have endeavoured to give, I am satisfied that the application should be refused. What I want to add is this: clearly notification to S needs to be handled with great sensitivity. If he remains married, living with a family, the capacity to cause him great embarrassment is obvious, and I would like some imaginative thought put into how he be approached and contacted and his wishes in terms of the litigation and potentially playing any part in his daughter's life understood in a way that can cause him the least embarrassment."
The Appeal
Discussion
". It has rightly been said that the maintenance of confidentiality is exceptional, and highly exceptional where a father has parental responsibility or where there is family life under Article 8. However, exceptionality is not in itself a test or a short cut; rather it is a reflection of the fact that the profound significance of adoption for the child and considerations of fairness to others means that the balance will often fall in favour of notification. But the decision on whether confidentiality should be maintained can only be made by striking a fair balance between the factors that are present in the individual case." (Emphasis provided)
"vi) Authorities in the Strasbourg jurisprudence put a high bar on excluding a parent with parental responsibility. In this context, where a parent has parental responsibility or a right to respect for family life under Art 8, a high degree of exceptionality must be demonstrated by strong countervailing factors to justify their exclusion from participation in the proceedings.
vii) It must be remembered that exceptionality is not, in itself, a test or a short cut and a fair balance must be struck between the factors that are present in the individual case."
"46. Each year local authorities issue care proceedings in the Family Court in which the fathers of the children concerned do not have parental responsibility and who, though not parties, are nonetheless entitled to receive a copy of Form C6A. Until they receive Form C6A some fathers are in a state of ignorance about the existence of their child. Others are aware of the existence of the child and of the fact that they are the child's biological father but have thus far shown no interest in the child's life. For the children involved it is important that attempts are made to engage with their birth father and perhaps also his wider family. The starting point must be two-fold. First, that it will normally be in the interests of the child that her birth father should receive a copy of Form C6A thereby enabling him to apply for party status so that he can participate in the proceedings. Second, that the child and her mother should not be put at risk of harm as a result of seeking to engage the father in the proceedings. It is a matter of balance and that is the case whether or not the father is entitled to the protection of Article 8 and Article 6."
Bean LJ:
I agree.
King LJ:
I also agree.
Neutral Citation Number: [2021] EWCA Civ 1221
Case No: B4/2021/1152
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT
HHJ Wood case number NE21 C00257
BETWEEN
Appellant
First Respondent
Second Respondent
Before Macur LJ, Bean LJ and King lJ
Sitting at the Royal Courts of Justice, on the 13.8.21
Upon the Court hearing in person from :
Counsel for the Appellant, Martin Todd
The First Respondent, Mr Frankie Shama
And The Second Respondent Susan Boothroyd;
And upon it being recorded for the legally assisted parties, that the court required attendance by the advocates from 09:45 hours;
And that the hearing concluded at 14:30, with the parties being asked to work over lunch;
And for 60 mins after the hearing time, for the preparation of the draft order.
Upon the Court hearing Counsel for the Appellant and both Respondents;
IT IS ORDERED
1. The appeal is dismissed;
2. Further, the Local Authority shall not act to serve the C6A notification on the birth father, prior to approval of the allocated Judge in this matter, HHJ Wood, as to how this service is to be effected;
3. No order for costs, save detailed assessment of the legally assisted parties' costs;