Family Court judge says process leading to placement of boy in France went “badly awry”, saw huge and “entirely unnecessary” delays

Mr Recorder Tyler KC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge at the Family Court in Leeds, said the delay had been “incomprehensible” and that the child, anonymously referred to as David, had been “significantly prejudiced”in part by Leeds City Council’s  “inexplicably blasé attitude”.

He said: “An image comes to mind of a head-office in an international business, with a series of clocks on the wall set to different time zones: the collective gaze in this case seems to have been on any clock other than the one named ‘David’s timescales’.”

David was born in 2020, and earlier this  year moved to France, into the care of his paternal aunt, as his father had died and his mother’s addiction issues meant she could not properly care for him and a placement with her had failed.

The judge noted the placement in France had gone well, but said the particular feature of this case which singled it out from others "and which casts a dark shadow over what would otherwise be a good news story" is that the court proceedings which culminated in his placement in France were issued in August 2022, a full two years and nine months before David was eventually able to move to his long-term home.

“The potential placement with the aunt was identified relatively late in the proceedings, but still a full one year and ten months before David’s move to the placement was actually achieved.”

By the time David was settled in France he was aged four years and eight months and had spent three years and eight months as the subject of care proceedings.

“Something has or some things have gone badly wrong, and David has been significantly prejudiced in the process,” the judge said.

Recorder Tyler said David’s long-term placement should have been determined and realised much, much sooner.

He acknowledged there were inevitable difficulties in placing a child out of the jurisdiction and because the aunt had refugee status in France and arrangements had to be made for her to enter the UK to meet David.

The first 53 weeks of these proceedings saw the case going through the Family Drug and Alcohol Court process.

“Given the very recent history of the previous proceedings and the failed placement with the mother, punctuated as it was by multiple relapses, it is difficult to see why this process was undertaken for a second time,” Recorder Tyler said.

He said there was a long delay in Leeds getting legal advice from France and when it did “the proceedings then became distracted by the ongoing efforts to obtain a visa to allow the aunt to travel from France to England for the purposes of the assessment”.

The legal issues concerning a placement outside the jurisdiction were not given any real further consideration for 14 months after the court and the parties had the positive initial viability assessment of the aunt.

David’s case then came before HHJ Hillier who included the recital: “The court reviewed the chronology of these proceedings and indicated that lessons must be learned in order that this is never repeated.”

The case reached Recorder Tyler in December 2024 when “despite what I understand to have been the robustly expressed views of HHJ Hillier...... in relation to the need for absolute expedition and compliance, an inexplicably blasé attitude seems to have continued, at least within the [local authority”].

He said Leeds was directed to file its evidence by 27 November 2024, but “simply did not do so”.

The judge added: “I learned at that hearing of a similarly unhurried approach having been taken by the LA to its dealings with the relevant central authorities, this both before and after the hearing before HHJ Hillier.”

The judge went on to observe that at the hearing in December 2024 he expressed "in relatively robust terms" his dissatisfaction with "the glacial speed with which the case had progressed for more than two years and, in that context, the shocking ongoing failure to comply with orders or to act with any sense of urgency, mindful of the previous delay.

“I directed the preparation of statements from [Leeds solicitor], explaining various delays for which he seemed to be responsible, and from the head of legal services at the LA, explaining why HHJ Hillier’s clear order in relation to the filing of final evidence was simply not complied with.”

Recorder Tyler said the criticism he had made were not directed at the council social work team that looked after David.

A Leeds City Council spokesperson said: “The case highlighted the complexities of care proceedings involving international jurisdictions and the challenges for local authorities in these circumstances. Lessons have been learnt from this case, which ultimately concluded with a positive placement for the child with his extended family.”

Mark Smulian