Placement orders for two children in long-term foster care were overturned due to the judge’s conduct during the final hearing, which rendered the process unfair to the mother. 

Case Background 

The family had been known to the local authority throughout the children’s lives. Despite the parents’ separation, problems continued, and a report indicated that the children were at risk of significant emotional neglect. The children’s guardian initially supported a care plan that the children remain with the mother under supervision orders, while the father sought their placement with the paternal grandmother. 

Final Hearing Conduct 

During the final hearing, the mother’s counsel requested more time to prepare an updated statement, which the judge refused. The guardian, after giving evidence, recommended long-term foster placement for the children. The judge denied the request for a further written report and refused the supervision order, ordering foster care instead. 

Court of Appeal’s Decision 

The Court of Appeal ruled that the judge’s management of the hearing was unfair. The judge’s refusal to hear interim submissions, unwillingness to cross-examine the father on domestic abuse, and repeated interruptions during the mother’s evidence-in-chief and cross-examination were deemed excessive. This level of judicial intervention hampered the ability to evaluate and weigh the evidence properly, impairing the judge’s judgment and rendering the trial unfair.