• Antony Wilkinson

Decision to ‘remove children from their grandparents was wrong’

Decision to ‘remove children from their grandparents was wrong’

The Court of Appeal has ruled that a decision to remove three children from the care of their grandparents was mistaken and could cause them emotional harm.

The children, aged six, four and three, had lived with their grandparents and maternal aunt since January 2019 after a somewhat chaotic lifestyle in their parents' care.

In March 2020, they became looked-after children. Medical examinations indicated developmental delay in one child and autism in the other two. The local authority positively assessed the grandparents but noted limited insight into the children's physical and emotional needs, the grandfather's conviction for serious violence 10 years previously and a very recent report of domestic abuse against the grandmother.

It explored placing the children in the aunt's care, but she was unable to commit long term. By that time, there were care proceedings. An interim order on 4 June 2020 provided for the children to remain with the grandparents.

On 16 June, after receiving certain allegations by the father against the grandparents, the local authority withdrew support for the placement and sought the removal of the children into foster care.

The recorder, sitting remotely because of the COVID-19 pandemic, noted that the aunt no longer lived with the grandparents and decided that tipped the balance in favour of placing the children in foster care.

The Court of Appeal overturned that decision, ruling that it was disproportionate.

It said the recorder had needed to balance the risks of leaving the children with the grandparents against the risk of removing them. He had considered the former at length, but the latter only briefly.

He had not given enough consideration to the emotional harm arising from separation. There was evidence that he had underestimated that harm, which would be substantial. Removal at an interim stage was a particularly sharp interference with a child's right to respect for family life.

These children were young and had been with their grandparents for 18 months. They would have no memory of any other home. The evidence that they had been caught up in family conflict was slim. The deficiencies in the grandparents' insight were manifestly not reasons for moving the children.

If you would like more information or advice about the issues raised in this article, or any aspect of family law please contact our expert legal team on 02080040065, by email at hello@southgate.co.uk or using the form below.

Case Citations: [2020] EWCA Civ 1003(1) NP (2) JP (3) GP v (1) A LOCAL AUTHORITY (2) NN (3-5) TN, JN & AN (BY THEIR CHILDREN'S GUARDIAN) (2020), CA (Civ Div) (McCombe LJ, Peter Jackson LJ, Baker LJ)

The contents of this article is general information only. The information in this article is not legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this article was published. Readers should not act on the basis of the information included and should obtain independent expert advice from qualified solicitors such as those within our firm.

What We Offer You








Enquiry Line

Out of Hours




No Hidden






Law Society


Do you need to discuss your family law matter with a solicitor?
Call us now or send an enquiry below to discuss your options!

Third Floor, Crown House, 47 Chase Side, London, N14 5BP

Tel: 0208 004 0065 - Email: hello@southgate.co.uk

southgate solicitors is a trading name of Southgate Solicitors Limited Company No: 10575376 - Registered Office at above address

We are authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority No: 636415

All prices displayed are inclusive of VAT.

VAT No: 263804305

Privacy Terms of Use - Complaints Process

  • Facebook Social Icon
  • Twitter Social Icon
  • Instagram Social Icon