Leicester City Council v T

No Substantial Judicial Treatment

 

Court

Family Court

 

Judgment Date

28 January 2016

 

Where Reported

[2016] EWFC 20

[2016] 1 WLUK 599

[2017] 1 F.L.R. 1585

[2016] Fam. Law 952

[2017] C.L.Y. 948

Judgment

 

Subject

Family law

 

Other related subjects

Local government

 

Keywords

Care orders; Child protection; Children’s welfare; Grandparents; Radicalisation; Removal from jurisdiction; Syria; Terrorism; Threshold criteria

 

Judge

Keehan J

 

Case Digest

Summary

Final care orders were made in relation to three children whose mother had tried to take them to Syria to join Islamic State.

 

Abstract

A local authority applied for final care orders in relation to three children aged 11, 8 and 5.

 

The children had been with their mother at an airport when she was arrested. Her phone was found to contain images of children with firearms and wearing balaclavas bearing the emblem of Islamic State. Examination of other electronic devices in her home revealed that she had been in conversation with a large number of people linked to Islamic State. She had also been provided with funds by persons unknown. The children were removed and placed with their maternal grandparents. The local authority sought findings that (i) it was the mother’s intention to go to a war zone in Syria controlled by Islamic State with the children and for all of them to remain there permanently; (ii) her intention to cross into Syria was driven by religious ideology and placed the children at risk of suffering significant harm and probable radicalisation, and being placed at risk of death; (iii) the mother intended to spend time with both the children and their father together, placing them at risk of ongoing exposure to domestic abuse and a risk of emotional harm.

 

 

Held

Application granted.

 

There was no doubt that the mother had intended to travel to Syria. She had been in contact with Jihadists solely for the purposes of going travelling there, and if she had succeeded in her attempts to join Islamic State, the children would have been put at extreme risk of very, very significant harm, if not death. Furthermore, the court was bound to draw the inference that the money found in the mother’s possession had come from Jihadist supporters. The findings sought by the local authority were amply supported by the evidence. The threshold criteria of the Children Act 1989 s.31(2) were satisfied in respect of each of the three children. It met the welfare best interests of all three children to remain in the care of their maternal grandparents who had provided them with excellent care. They would be at risk of harm were they to return to their mother’s care. Accordingly it was appropriate to make care orders in respect of each of the three children in favour of the local authority (see paras 14, 16-19 of judgment).