Armagh and Dungannon Health & Social Services Trust v A
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | District Judge (MC) Meehan |
| Neutral Citation | [2006] NIMag 1 |
| Court | Magistrates' Court (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 24 October 2006 |
Neutral Citation no. [2006] NIMag 1 Ref: Mag 36
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered: 24/10/06
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Armagh and Dunganno n Health &
Social Services Trust
Applicant
AND
A
Respondent
Family Proceedings Court at East Tyrone
County Court Division of
Fermanagh and Tyrone
Preliminary
1. I have prepared this judgment in an anonymised form. Nothing must be
published which might lead, either directly or indirectly, to the
identification of the child or any of his family.
2. On the afternoon of Friday, 30th June 2006 two Social Workers, Mrs. C
and Mrs. D, from Armagh and Dungannon Health and Social Services
Trust attended me in chambers at Dungannon Courthouse, without legal
representation, to seek the ex parte Hearing of an application for an
Emergency Protection Order.
3. The case concerned a 7-year-old Portuguese boy, B, who had been
removed from his mother’s care on the previous Sunday evening (25th
June) with, I was told, her agreement. He had remained in a foster
placement throughout that week. On the Friday morning, his mother
expressed a desire to have him returned to her and, in response, Social
Services had initiated the application. Social Workers had told Mrs. A
of their intentions, but had given her no further information as to the
Hearing, although they had been engaged that afternoon in trying to put
her in touch with a Solicitor of her choice with respect to the case
generally. No papers had been served upon Mrs. A. There was no issue
as to a risk of her abducting the child; she did not even know the
address of the foster carers with whom her son had been placed.
4. In A Trust v M [2005] Mag 33 (unreported judgment dated 7th
December 2005), I dealt at length with the prevailing deficiencies of
practice in respect of applications for Emergency Protection Orders,
including deficiencies in the approach taken by Social Services. I do
not propose to restate that judgment; suffice to say that an application
for leave to proceed ex parte, with the features which I have just
summarized, was bound to fail.
5. Kerr, LCJ, pointed out in AR v Homefirst Community Trust, [2005]
NICA 8 that “By virtue of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 it is
unlawful for a public authority to act in a way that is incompatible with
a convention right. Both the trust and the court are constituted public
authorities for the purpose of this section.”
6. Article 6 of The European Convention on Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms reads;
‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any cri minal charge
against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an
independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced
publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the
interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests
of juveniles or the protec tion of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent
strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would
prejudice the interests of justice.’
I refused leave to proceed with the Application ex parte and directed that
the application be listed for hearing on Tuesday, 4th July, upon notice to
Mrs. A. I also directed that Ms. D, Senior Social Worker, write up her
notes taken during the hearing of the application for leave and that these be
served upon the Respondent. Finally, it was also directed that a Guardian
ad Litem be appointed for the subject child.
The Background History
7. Mrs. A therefore appeared for the renewed Application by Armagh and
Dungannon Trust for an Emergency Protection Order the following
week. She was represented by her solicitor, Mr. Quinn, and assisted by
an Interpreter. The Trust’s application was grounded on the evidence of
three Social Workers, Mr. E, Assistant Principal Social Worker, Mrs. F,
a Senior Social Worker, and Ms. D.
8. Late in the evening of Friday, 23rd June 2006, the Police had received
notification that the subject child had been badly beaten. Officers went
out that night to the family home, but got no response. Next morning,
the 24th, the Police did find both mother and son at home. They saw
evidence of serious injuries to the child’s back and called in the Care
Unit of Social Services. Ms. G, on duty as the Emergency Social
Worker, attended the home and liaised with Mr. H, the Duty Co-
ordinator at that time. With the assistance of a Constable I, who was
able to act as interpreter, Ms. G obtained the verbal consent of Mrs. A to
her son being brought to Dungannon Police Station for a forensic
examination. They were met there by Ms. J of the Care Unit, who
explained about making a formal complaint against the perpetrator and
established that Mrs. A did not wish to adopt that course. The mother’s
To continue reading
Request your trial