Lancashire County Council v G (No 2) [2020] EWHC 3124 (Fam)
DOL of child at unregulated placement (1) The judge concluded that "once again with deep reservations, I [remain] satisfied on balance that it is in G's best interests to authorise the deprivation of her liberty in her current placement notwithstanding that the placement is plainly sub-optimal from the perspective of meeting G's identified and highly complex welfare needs and is an unregulated placement". (2) The following observations by the Children's Commissioner in a briefing paper entitled "The children who no-one knows what to do with" (published in November 2020 after the previous judgment in this case) were noted: (a) no work is being done to forecast and co-ordinate provision of secure accommodation and regulated placements in order to match need; (b) there are some 200 children awaiting a place in secure accommodation; (c) during 2018/2019 12,800 children spent some time accommodated in unregulated placements with no regulatory oversight by OFSTED.
Full judgment: BAILII
Subject(s):
- Inherent jurisdiction cases🔍 Older inherent jurisdiction cases can still be found in Category:Other capacity cases
Date: 20/11/20🔍
Court: High Court (Family Division)🔍
Judicial history:
Judge(s):
- MacDonald🔍
Parties:
Citation number(s):
What links here:- Lancashire County Council v G [2020] EWHC 2828 (Fam)
- Lancashire County Council v G (No 3) [2020] EWHC 3280 (Fam)
- Lancashire County Council v G (No 4) [2021] EWHC 244 (Fam)
Published: 12/12/20 11:11
Cached: 2024-11-21 15:32:13
The following categories (in blue boxes) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: