Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2011]JRC186A

Royal Court

(Family)

28 September 2011

Before     :

M. C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Bailiff, and Jurats Morgan and Kerley.

 

IN THE MATTER OF TT

AND IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 24(2) OF THE CHILDREN (JERSEY) LAW 2002

Advocate D. C. Robinson for the Minister.

Advocate C Hall for the Mother.

Advocate I. C. Jones for the Father.

Advocate M. J. Haines for the Maternal Grandmother.

judgment

the bailiff:

1.        B and C have two children, A, aged 4 and TT aged 1.  The Court has two separate applications before it.  First the Minister is applying for a care order in respect of TT and secondly, D, the maternal grandmother, is applying for a residence order in respect of both A and TT but the only active matter before us today is that in respect of A.  So we are concerned today with whether to make an interim care order in respect of TT and a residence order in respect of A. 

2.        The background is that A was made the subject of an emergency protection order back in May 2008 and then an interim care order on 27^th June, 2008.  Both the father and the mother were subsequently charged with neglect for which they received a Community Service Order.  However, on 13^th May, 2010, in view of the apparent improvement in the parenting of A, the Minister withdrew his application for a care order. 

3.        After the birth of TT in 2010 the family situation apparently started to deteriorate.  On 18^th August, 2010, TT was taken to hospital with a fractured femur.  The father subsequently pleaded guilty to committing a grave and criminal assault on her and was sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment.  He was released on 18^th August, 2011.  Following her discharge from hospital in September 2010, TT has been in voluntary care and she has been placed with foster carers.  A moved to live with her grandmother in August 2010 and has been there ever since. 

4.        We will deal first with the Minister's application for an interim care order in respect of TT.  We must remind ourselves first of all of Article 30(1) of the Children (Jersey) Law 2002 which says:-

"(1) The court may make an interim care order where, in relation to the child concerned, it:-

a) adjourns any application for a care order; or

b) gives a direction under Article 29(1),

provided that it is satisfied that there reasonable grounds for believing that the circumstances with respect to that child are as mentioned in Article 24(2)."

One then reverts to Article 24(2) to see what those circumstances are and Article 24(2) says this:-

"(2) The court may only make a care order or supervision order if it is satisfied:-

(a)       that the child concerned is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm; and

(b)      that the harm, or likelihood of harm, is attributable to:-

(i)        the care given to the child, or likely to be given to the child if the order were not made, not being what it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give the child, or

(ii)       the child's being beyond parental control."

5.        Now in this case we have received a detailed report from the social worker with the Children's Service on behalf of the Minister.  Both the mother and the father agree that the test in Article 30(1) is met, as indeed does the grandmother.  We are satisfied from the papers before us that the criteria in Article 30(1) are met, namely that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the test set out in Article 24(2) is met.  We also consider it to be in TT's best interests for an interim care order to be made and we therefore adjourn the application for a care order but make an interim care order until 7^th October. 

6.        So far as A is concerned, these are private law proceedings to which the Minister is not technically a party although clearly the Children's Service are aware of the position.  Here the grandmother applies for a residence order and both the mother and the father agree to that.  This reflects the position that has existed since August 2010 and in the light of the agreement of the parties and the material before us, we make the residence order. 

7.        That therefore concludes the two main matters we have to consider today. 

Authorities

Children (Jersey) Law 2002.