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

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2019/0188

Parties

Appellant(s)

T (A child)

Respondent(s)

See judgment

Issue

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? If it is, what legal test should the courts apply when determining whether to exercise the inherent jurisdiction? 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.

Date of issue

2 September 2019

Judgment details

Judgment date

30 July 2021

Neutral citation

[2021] UKSC 35

Judgment links

Judgment summary

30 July 2021

Appeal

Justices

Lady Black

Lord Lloyd-Jones

Lady Arden

Lord Hamblen

Lord Stephens.

Hearing dates

Full hearing

Start date

28 October 2020

End date

29 October 2020

Watch hearings

Back to top