Court Report: Appeal against an assessment refusal

In this case, a mother appealed the decision of Judge Judith Hughes refusing her application for a viability assessment with a view to making a residential assessment under section 38(6) of the Children Act 1989. The refusal was based on evidence submitted to the court by a psychiatrist and a psychologist, which pointed out that such an assessment would illustrate the mother's functionality in a residential assessment setting, but not in a community setting. The psychiatrist also argued that while the applicant might do well in such an assessment, she was at a very early stage in addressing her mental health care needs and thus at risk of reverting to unhealthy coping mechanisms that she had used in previous years. Overall, both experts indicated that the mother had not yet adequately dealt with her mental health issues to provide the necessary care and parenting to her child.

In her appeal, the mother argued that without a residential assessment, the outcome of the case would be a "foregone conclusion". This argument relied on the observations of the Court of Appeal in the case of Re L and H (Residential Assessment). The appeal was refused by the president Sir Nicholas Wall, who stated that Judge Hughes had been right and in accordance with the Public Law Outline to accept the evidence submitted by the psychiatrist and psychologist, and that based on this evidence, a residential assessment would be pointless.

To see the judgment in full, go to cypnow.co.uk/doc.

OTHER RECENT DECISIONS

Case name: C (A Child)

Case number: [2011] EWCA Civ 918

www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.

aspx?i=ed85000

Case name: R (O) v LB of Hammersmith & Fulham

Case number: [2011] EWCA Civ 925

www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.

aspx?i=ed84928.