Case details

In the matter of T (A Child) (Appellant)

Case ID: UKSC 2019/0188

Case summary

Issue

  1. In circumstances where insufficient places are available in registered secure children's homes, is the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction to authorise a child's placement in unregistered secure accommodation lawful?
  2. If it is, what legal test should the courts apply when determining whether to exercise the inherent jurisdiction?
  3. Is a child's consent to the confinement of any relevance when determining whether to exercise the inherent jurisdiction?

Facts

The appellant, T, was a 15-year-old child who was subject to a care order. The local authority, CBC, wished to place T in secure accommodation. Since there were no places available in registered secure children's homes, CBC applied to the High Court for orders under its inherent jurisdiction authorising T's placement in non-statutory accommodation. T had consented to the restrictions on her liberty in the placements sought and submitted that the orders restricting her liberty were, therefore, unnecessary.

The High Court did not consider that consent to be valid, and duly made the orders sought by CBC. T seeks to challenge those orders. She does not object to the placements or the restrictions on her liberty, but wishes to be recognised as capable of consenting in law.

The Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal. T now appeals to the Supreme Court.

Parties

Appellant(s)

T (A child)

Appeal

Justices

Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lady Arden, Lord Hamblen, Lord Stephens.

Hearing start date

28 Oct 2020

Hearing finish date

29 Oct 2020

Reporting restrictions

In the matter of T (A Child) (Appellant)

Case ID: UKSC 2019/0188

THE COURT ORDERED that no one shall publish or reveal the name or address of the Appellant who is the subject of these proceedings or publish or reveal any information which would be likely to lead to the identification of the Appellant or of any member of her family in connection with these proceedings.