View source for A Local Authority v E (2007) EWHC 2396 (Fam)

''Application by a local authority under the inherent jurisdiction of the court for directions as to the future of a vulnerable person who has been in care and has now reached 18.''

==Summary==

The local authority was seeking directions as to the future residence and contact with the parents as they could no longer exercise parental responsibility through a care plan. The child A had severe medical problems amd possibly suffered from Rubinstein Taybor syndrome. She had been cared for in a residential unit with intermittent contact with the parents. The situation was complicated by the parents stance that they would cease contact altogether if they were not given residence. The local authority therefore sought direction on 5 points: (1) A lacks capacity to decide on where she should live and who should care for her; (2) A's best interests would be best served by remaining at the unit for now and then be moved to a long-term residential unit for over 18's; (3) contact with her parents should be at the Council's discretion; (4) the Council should be able to consent to any medical treatment which A requires; (5) the Council should make all other decisions in respect of A as are necessary.

After reviewing the evidence the President ordered that A's best interests would be best served by moving to the long-term residential unit but that any contact with the the parents should be unsupervised. 

[[Family Law Week]] (see link below) have kindly agreed for the above case summary to be used on this page.

==Resources==
{{#bailii:[2007] EWHC 2396 (Fam)}}

[http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed1053 Family Law Week report]

[[Category:Other capacity cases]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2007 cases]]