[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-169202-en":3,"doc-seo-169202-105":30,"detail-sidebar-cat-1-en-105":92},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":11,"category_id":12,"category_name":13,"doc_title":14,"doc_description":15,"doc_content":16,"file_id":17,"file_url":18,"file_type":19,"file_size":20,"view_count":11,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":11,"is_downloadable":11,"audit_status":11,"page_count":21,"language":22,"language_code":23,"site_id":24,"html_lang":23,"table_of_contents":25,"faqs":26,"seo_title":27,"seo_description":15,"update_tm":28,"read_time":29},169202,687197207919,"Theodora","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/a000253d6f5f7c60be?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1779446848396160552",1,158,"General","This is the judgment of the court to which all three members have contributed","Judgment of the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) concerning an interim order in a child welfare case, heard remotely due to COVID-19. The court allowed the appeal and set aside an interim care order made after a telephone hearing, finding it should not have been made. The decision focuses on remote-hearing fairness and substantive law continuity, emphasizing that good practice can support fairness while courts must manage added burdens and prioritize urgent decisions. Background details describe concerns about placement stability, safeguarding risks, and the circumstances leading to the children’s removal and later return.","Neutral Citation Number: [2020] EWCA Civ 584\nCase No: B4/2020/0618\nIN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)\nON APPEAL FROM THE WEST LONDON FAMILY COURT\nRecorder McCarthy QC\nZW20C00148\nRoyal Courts of Justice\nStrand, London, WC2A 2LL\nDate: 30 April 2020\nBefore :\nTHE PRESIDENT OF THE FAMILY DIVISION\nLORD JUSTICE PETER JACKSON\nand\nLADY JUSTICE NICOLA DAVIES\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\nStephen Lue (instructed by Jung & Co Solicitors) for the Appellant Maternal Grandmother\nMax Melsa (instructed by London Borough of Ealing) for the Respondent Local Authority\nPhilip Squire (instructed by Thompson & Co Solicitors Ltd) for the Respondent Children by their Children’s Guardian\nHearing date: 23 April 2020\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\nApproved Judgment\nCovid-19 Protocol:  This judgment was handed down remotely by circulation to the parties’ representatives by email, release to BAILII and publication on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website.  The date and time for hand-down is deemed to be\nat 10:30am on Thursday, 30 April 2020.\nSir Andrew McFarlane P:\nThis is the judgment of the court to which all three members have contributed.\nThis case, which concerns an interim order, is the second appeal in a case relating to the welfare of children to reach the Court of Appeal on the issue of remote hearings during the COVID 19 pandemic.  The appeal was heard on 23 April 2020.  On the previous day the same constitution heard the first such appeal: Re A (Children)(Remote Hearing: Care and Placement Orders) [2020] EWCA Civ 583.  In that judgment we summarised current guidance and set out a number of cardinal points and relevant factors with a view to assisting courts to make appropriate decisions in this changing landscape.\nAt the end of the hearing of this appeal, we informed the parties that the appeal would be allowed and that an interim care order made at a telephone hearing in the family court on 3 April would be set aside.  The appeal concerned a 9-year-old boy, Sam (not his real name).  As a result of the order he had been removed from the care of his grandmother and placed in foster care.  The order should not have been made and Sam has now returned home.\nIn the present abnormal circumstances, the fundamental principles of substantive law and procedural fairness are unchanged.  Alongside other courts and tribunals, the Family Court continues to discharge its duties, particularly in urgent child protection cases.  The effective use of communication technology is indispensable to this ability to continue to deliver justice.  A remote hearing, where it is appropriate, can replicate some but not all of the characteristics of a fully attended hearing.  Provided good practice is followed, it will be a fair hearing, but we must be alert to ensure that the dynamics and demands of the remote process do not impinge upon the fundamental principles.  In particular, experience shows that remote hearings place additional, and in some cases, considerable burdens on the participants.  The court must therefore seek to ensure that it does not become overloaded and must make a hard-headed distinction between those decisions that must be prioritised and those that must unfortunately wait until proper time is available.\nIn our judgement, the events in the present case illustrate why this approach is necessary.  The problems here arose because the local authority changed its care plan in the middle of a remote hearing and because an application that was not urgent was treated as if it was.  We will briefly summarise the background, and then describe the course of the proceedings in more detail.\nSam has an 11-year-old sister, whom we will call Samantha.  Their mother is a drug user with a criminal record and their father, who died in 2019, was also a prolific drug user.  When they were young, the local authority took care proceedings and in July 2013, their maternal grandmother, who is now aged 6","cbCaiatY08sAkFC1","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiatY08sAkFC1","docx",72875,14,"English","en",105,"# Proceedings and outcome\n## Interim care order and the appeal hearing\n# Remote hearings during COVID-19\n## Fairness principles and burdens on participants\n# Background facts\n## Family situation and child protection plans\n# Course of the proceedings\n## Incident leading to removal and later return","[{\"question\":\"What was the court’s decision on the interim care order?\",\"answer\":\"The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the interim care order made at a telephone hearing on 3 April. As a result, the 9-year-old boy returned home.\"},{\"question\":\"Why was the appeal connected to remote hearings during the COVID-19 pandemic?\",\"answer\":\"The case raised the issue of remote hearings in the Court of Appeal during the pandemic. The judgment addresses guidance and factors to help courts make appropriate decisions in this changing context.\"},{\"question\":\"What approach did the court stress for remote hearings to remain fair?\",\"answer\":\"The court stated that substantive law and procedural fairness principles remain unchanged. With good practice, a remote hearing can be fair, but courts must watch for remote dynamics that add burdens and must prioritize urgent decisions while postponing what cannot be handled immediately.\"}]","This is the judgment of the court to which all three members have contributed | DOCX",1788248399,5,{"code":4,"msg":31,"data":32},"ok",{"site_id":24,"language":23,"slug":33,"title":14,"keywords":34,"description":15,"schema_data":35,"social_meta":87,"head_meta":89,"extra_data":91,"updated_unix":28},"this-is-the-judgment-of-the-court-to-which-all-three-members-have-contributed","",{"@graph":36,"@context":86},[37,54,69],{"@type":38,"itemListElement":39},"BreadcrumbList",[40,44,48,51],{"item":41,"name":42,"@type":43,"position":11},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":45,"name":46,"@type":43,"position":47},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/","Template",2,{"item":49,"name":13,"@type":43,"position":50},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/general/",3,{"item":52,"name":14,"@type":43,"position":53},"https://docshare.wps.com/template/this-is-the-judgment-of-the-court-to-which-all-three-members-have-contributed/169202/",4,{"url":52,"name":14,"@type":55,"author":56,"headline":14,"publisher":58,"fileFormat":61,"inLanguage":23,"description":15,"dateModified":62,"datePublished":63,"encodingFormat":61,"isAccessibleForFree":64,"interactionStatistic":65},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":57},"Person",{"url":41,"name":59,"@type":60},"DocShare","Organization","application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document","2026-09-04","2026-09-01",true,{"@type":66,"interactionType":67,"userInteractionCount":11},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":68},"ViewAction",{"@type":70,"mainEntity":71},"FAQPage",[72,78,82],{"name":73,"@type":74,"acceptedAnswer":75},"What was the court’s decision on the interim care order?","Question",{"text":76,"@type":77},"The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the interim care order made at a telephone hearing on 3 April. As a result, the 9-year-old boy returned home.","Answer",{"name":79,"@type":74,"acceptedAnswer":80},"Why was the appeal connected to remote hearings during the COVID-19 pandemic?",{"text":81,"@type":77},"The case raised the issue of remote hearings in the Court of Appeal during the pandemic. The judgment addresses guidance and factors to help courts make appropriate decisions in this changing context.",{"name":83,"@type":74,"acceptedAnswer":84},"What approach did the court stress for remote hearings to remain fair?",{"text":85,"@type":77},"The court stated that substantive law and procedural fairness principles remain unchanged. With good practice, a remote hearing can be fair, but courts must watch for remote dynamics that add burdens and must prioritize urgent decisions while postponing what cannot be handled immediately.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":52,"og:type":88,"og:title":14,"og:site_name":59,"og:description":15},"article",{"robots":90,"canonical":52},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":24},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":93},[94,99,104,108,113,118,123,128,132],{"id":95,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":96,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":98},11,"Presentations",90,"presentations",{"id":100,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":101,"show_sort_weight":102,"slug":103},12,"Resumes",80,"resumes",{"id":21,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":105,"show_sort_weight":106,"slug":107},"Invoices",70,"invoices",{"id":109,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":110,"show_sort_weight":111,"slug":112},15,"Posters",60,"posters",{"id":114,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":115,"show_sort_weight":116,"slug":117},16,"Social Media",50,"social-media",{"id":119,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":122},17,"Forms",40,"forms",{"id":124,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":126,"slug":127},18,"Letters",30,"letters",{"id":129,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":130,"show_sort_weight":29,"slug":131},21,"Paper Templates","papers-templates",{"id":12,"doc_module":11,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":13,"show_sort_weight":4,"slug":133},"general-158"]