{"id":648982,"date":"2026-04-22T15:03:52","date_gmt":"2026-04-22T13:03:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/"},"modified":"2026-04-22T15:03:52","modified_gmt":"2026-04-22T13:03:52","slug":"plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/","title":{"rendered":"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

HER HONOUR JUDGE SEARLE: 1. This is a final hearing in relation to two boys: B and C. B and C are both under the age of 8 and attend primary school.. They are the children of M their mother, and F2 their father. 2. The local authority issued public law proceedings on 1 June 2021 as a result of allegations made by their older half-sister A against primarily the father. Those allegations led to a fact-finding where findings were made that reflect, in this court\u2019s view, one of the worst cases seen of abuse of a child. It included findings of physical assault, sexual assault, coercion and control, and emotional harm. A, who was brave enough to bring her allegations to the attention of professionals and eventually the local authority, was the victim of those findings. This judgment should be read alongside the schedule of findings made. 3. It had been hoped that at the IRH listed on 13 January the court would be able to make final orders. However, although the care plan of the local authority was that the two boys should be made subject to care orders, and although that care plan was supported by the guardian and by the mother, the previous order listing that IRH on 13 January did not make it plain on the face of the order that if any party was absent for that hearing, final orders may be made. 4. There had been a lack of engagement on the part of the father and although the father\u2019s solicitors had left messages for the father that final orders might be made at the IRH in his absence there was no order stating that. it was felt safer to ensure that an order was made setting that out so that that order could be served on the father . Therefore the matter was adjourned to a one hour hearing before me today. 5. Today\u2019s hearing has been attended by the local authority through counsel, the mother through counsel, the father is not present, and the guardian is represented through a solicitor. 6. There is now a statement from the father\u2019s solicitor before the court setting out the efforts made to contact the father .. 7. It has been confirmed to me through counsel this morning that the mobile number that was used, has been contacted repeatedly but to no avail. The court being told that it is a mobile number that historically has been used by the father to communicate with his solicitor about court proceedings. 8. The position that is apparent from that statement is that every attempt has been made to contact the father to ensure that he is aware of what is going on within these court proceedings . The court notes at para.4 of that statement that there was an indication on the phone that was used to send the message that the message had, in fact, been read. However, the father himself has kept in the shadows. He has made sure that he has not been active in engaging with his solicitor. 9. I have to consider whether in the face of that and in the face of being required to make final orders whether there should be an adjournment. Ms Parkhouse, who has represented the father throughout, albeit being led by then Queen\u2019s Counsel for the fact-finding, attended on the last occasion. She is without instructions and she is not in a position to ask for an adjournment as she has no instructions as to why father is not present and not able to give instructions. 10. This court and this Judge has experience of this case and has conducted many hearings where the father has been involved. This father, the court has found, has tried to deceive those who have engaged with him with regard to his ability to engage. 11. This has been as extraordinary case. The court recalls that within the fact-finding, there were numerous occasions when the father attempted to avoid engagement by claiming that he was sick or unable to engage, but those claims were found to be on all occasions, completely untrue. This court has no doubt that the reality of the situation now is that the father simply chooses not to engage and it is possible that the father just wants to delay matters. The court is aware that criminal proceedings have been started against the father and the court has been informed that even at the last criminal hearing, the father attended so late that, effectively, no proper court work and decisions could be made within that hearing. 12. This court sees no justification on this matter being adjourned. Every effort has been made to give him notice of this hearing . The court reminds itself that under the Children Act 1989 that these children are its paramount concern and that delay, as a general principle, is not in the interests of these children. Therefore, I am satisfied, and it will be recorded, that the court being satisfied that the father\u2019s team has done everything it can to contact the father . 13. I note that at this point that during the process of the delivering this judgment, Ms Parkhouse , counsel for the father informed the court that she had just received a text that her solicitor was emailing her . The court allowed her some time to confirm her instructions . 14. When Ms Parkhouse came back into this remote hearing, she informed the court that : She had spoken to her instructing solicitor and that her instructions were that F2 has been in hospital; that he is now no longer in hospital ; that he is able to give instructions; that he does not oppose the making of the care order and wishes that the children be told that he loves them . 15. With regard to the children being known by the surname of their foster carer, which the court notes is not technically an application to change their surnames, Ms Parkhouse informed the court that the father was not particularly happy 16. In view of this new information the court considers again whether this hearing needs to be adjourned There was no application behalf of the father for an adjournment. There is perhaps a slight ambiguity with regard to the father\u2019s instructions with regard to the applications 2 and 3, but the court\u2019s view is that there has been ample time for the father to give instructions and that, in any event, the merits of this would suggest that orders need to be made. 17. Therefore even after this further information about and from the father , the court again records that it is satisfied that the father has been given proper notice of this hearing. He knows that the hearing is taking place and he knows that final orders are taking place. I therefore proceed to consider the applications before me. 18. With regard to the application for a care order, the court notes that the mother agrees with the application for full care orders in relation to both B and C. The guardian agrees, and the father\u2019s position we now hear is that he does not oppose. 19. The court notes that the local authority is seeking a public law order. It reminds itself that for the court to consider making a public law order in relation to each child, the court needs to be satisfied that threshold is met. Here, the findings clearly cross threshold. The court considers the Children Act 1989 and reminds itself that each child is its paramount concern, that delay as a general principle is not in the interests of the child. 20. The court also considers the realistic proposal available for the welfare of these children and the court notes that here, the father, against whom there were the most serious of findings, did not engage with any risk assessment. There has been a parenting assessment of the mother but the mother does not stand in the way of these orders and stands back from proposing to care for these children. I have read the final statement of the social worker which is supportive of the placement and read the final care plan and the guardian\u2019s analysis. 21. There is sadly no family option available for these boys. The mother no longer puts herself forward as a carer. They have a relationship with the mother and it is agreed that the contact will be set at six times a year for two hours. 22. There will be care orders. There will be a regular statutory meetings in order to keep contact under review . 23. The court is satisfied when considering the options that these children are too old for adoption. They have a real relationship with mother. Therefore, the only viable option is long term foster care. They are currently with the intended foster carer and they are doing well. It is proposed that they will move to a school nearby local to the foster carer and such a move, in the view of the court, is a real opportunity for these boys. I therefore have no hesitation in approving the care plan and making full care orders in relation to both children. 24. This then takes me on to the issue of the change of usage of the children\u2019s names. The local authority agrees that this is necessary. The mother agrees and the guardian agrees. The father\u2019s response, we understand as of this morning, is that he is not particularly happy with this. The court considers the welfare checklist. This application is not a formal application for change of name but that they should be known by the surname of their foster carer. Considering the welfare checklist, the overwhelming need of these boys is to have a loving, healthy, calm existence. . The court notes that the application has been made in view of the pending criminal trial of the father, on the basis that if the children continued to be known by their father\u2019s surname \u2013 its unusual spelling would put the boys at risk of being associated with harmful headlines . 25. In the judgment in the fact finding hearing, this court has already alluded to the fact that the court considers that this is one of the most serious cases of child abuse that it has been seen in this court . That view was also expressed by other legal representatives in court. This court has no doubt that there is a real risk that when criminal proceedings start properly that there will be much publicity and that those who bear the same name, are at risk of being associated with the horrors of this case. I consider the welfare checklist, consider and conclude that it is in these children\u2019s welfare interests to be known now by the name of the foster carer. 26. The remaining application is made by the guardian on behalf of A. In my judgment in the fact finding hearing, I indicated that she should be given credit for what she has done in bringing these allegations to the attention of professionals. There is no doubt on the part of this court that she has suffered hugely whilst being in F2\u2019s household. The application is made on the basis that it is right that she has an opportunity of seeking advice and that she needs to have access to the papers and needs to be able to show the papers with her advisers at Enable Law. 25 The court looks at the prejudice that there would be to any of the parties. The local authority supports this application. The mother supports this application. The guardian supports this application. 27. The court considers the impact on the children. The very fact that the court has now made an order whereby the children can be known by a different surname means that although their involvement and their presence at the time of abuse is noted in the papers which is prejudicial to them, the court\u2019s view is that it is of limited prejudice on the basis that no one would be able to identify who those boys are because of the fact they will be known by a different name. 28. F2 does not have parental responsibility for A but it is necessary to consider his views as he is mentioned at length in the case papers. When dealing with the position of the prejudice to F2, the reality is that there is going to be publicity as a result of the criminal proceedings. I anticipate that much of the detail will be splashed across the press. I cannot see, therefore, that to the extent that he is prejudiced, that there is anything more than minimal prejudice to him for any details to be provided to Enable Law. 29. I need to deal with the position of F1. F1 is A\u2019s birth father. He has parental responsibility. I have been informed that attempts have been made to contact him but there has been no response 30. The court has been reminded this morning of the very limited references to F1 which are his position statement of 10 November 2022 and his parenting assessment of him of October 2022. It is accepted that such documents would not be relevant for the purposes of Enable Law and they will be deleted. Therefore, there is no prejudice to F1 in any event . 31. I therefore come to the view that, the papers should be disclosed to Enable Law in order that they may advise her about possible legal redress. — — — — — — — — — — — —<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Sources officielles :<\/strong> consulter la page source<\/a><\/p>\n

Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

HER HONOUR JUDGE SEARLE: 1. This is a final hearing in relation to two boys: B and C. B and C are both under the age of 8 and attend primary school.. They are the children of M their mother, and F2 their father. 2. The local authority issued public law proceedings on 1 June 2021 as a result of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7608],"kji_court":[8063],"kji_chamber":[],"kji_year":[24566],"kji_subject":[7638],"kji_keyword":[7919,8244,8048,7916,7707],"kji_language":[7611],"class_list":["post-648982","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-royaume-uni","kji_court-family-court-b-district-and-circuit-judges","kji_year-24566","kji_subject-famille","kji_keyword-application","kji_keyword-children","kji_keyword-father","kji_keyword-hearing","kji_keyword-order","kji_language-anglais"],"yoast_head":"\nPlymouth City Council v M & Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"HER HONOUR JUDGE SEARLE: 1. This is a final hearing in relation to two boys: B and C. B and C are both under the age of 8 and attend primary school.. They are the children of M their mother, and F2 their father. 2. The local authority issued public law proceedings on 1 June 2021 as a result of...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"11 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\\\/\",\"name\":\"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-22T13:03:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors","og_description":"HER HONOUR JUDGE SEARLE: 1. This is a final hearing in relation to two boys: B and C. B and C are both under the age of 8 and attend primary school.. They are the children of M their mother, and F2 their father. 2. The local authority issued public law proceedings on 1 June 2021 as a result of...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f":"11 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/","name":"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-22T13:03:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/plymouth-city-council-v-m-ors\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Plymouth City Council v M & Ors"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/648982","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=648982"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=648982"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=648982"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=648982"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=648982"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=648982"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=648982"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=648982"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}