Search results
Sep 13, 2021 · At directions hearings held on 1 September 2021, Mr Justice MacDonald dealt with seven cases in which the issue of whether it was still open to the High Court to authorise deprivations of liberty of a child under the age of 16.
Nov 12, 2021 · Mr Justice MacDonald 3 November 2021 Ofsted describes the problems housing teenagers who need high levels of support as "very worrying" with children exposed "to a risk of serious harm".
May 11, 2022 · The President’s answer is that ‘placement in an unregistered children’s home is, and has always been, wholly outside the statutory scheme, and not therefore within s 22C (6) (d) [of the Children Act 1989]’ (para 73).
Jan 30, 2023 · Is depriving a person of their mobile phone depriving them of their liberty? That was the very 21 st century question confronting MacDonald J in Manchester City Council v CP & Ors [2023] EWHC 133 (Fam). Whilst his analysis concerned the position of a 16 year, his conclusions apply equally to adults.
The Statutory and Regulatory regime was set out by MacDonald J in Deby City Council and others [2021] EWHC 2931 (Fam); “21. Section 22(3) of the Children Act 1989 places on local authorities a duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of any child looked after by the local authority.
May 20, 2022 · MacDonald J summarised the legal principles governing the determination of an application for an order authorising the deprivation of a child's liberty under the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court in Salford CC v M (Deprivation of Liberty in Scotland) [2019] EWHC 1510 (Fam).
Jan 14, 2022 · MacDonald J differentiated this case from both Lancashire v G (Unavailability of Secure Accommodation) [2020] EWHC 2828 (Fam) and Tameside MBC v L (Unavailability of Regulated Therapeutic Placement) [2021] EWHC 1814 (Fam) where the living and care arrangements for the subject children were sub-optimal, as opposed to positively inappropriate to ...
