The applicant sought a writ of habeas corpus in respect of her four children who had been removed by the police, and were residing with the local authority under interim care orders. She said they were held against their wills.
Held: The proper forum for such a challenges is the care proceedings, and the administrative court should not intervene. Since in any event the children were not held securely, but were living with foster parents, they were not being detained, and habeas corpus was inappropriate.
Judges:
Munby J
Citations:
Times 27-Nov-2003, Gazette 08-Jan-2004
Citing:
Cited – In re C (Adoption: Religious observance) 2002
. .
Cited – In re M (Care Proceedings: Judicial Review); In the matter of unborn baby M R; X and Y, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire County Council Admn 15-Apr-2003
Munby J said: ‘If a baby is to be removed from its mother, one would normally expect arrangements to be made by the local authority to facilitate contact on a regular basis . . Those arrangements must be driven by the needs of the family, not . .
Cited – In re L (Care proceedings: Human Rights Claims) 2003
The court set out appropriate procedures designed to human rights claims, even properly brought, from de-railing care proceedings. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children
Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.188375