The Court of Appeal has handed down an important judgment concerning the obligation on a Judge to rigorously and independently consider the ‘threshold’ criteria when making findings under s.31(2) of the Children Act 1989 at an IRH treated as a final hearing. Jessica Lee and Sapna Jain, instructed by Ringrose Law, acted for the child. As Cobb LJ made clear, ‘there is no less a duty upon the judge to express clearly their findings and reasons if any of the parties (the parents in this instance) are absent from the hearing at which these crucial decisions are being made, even if absent by their own choosing.’ (paragraph 48)

​The Court invited the Lead Judge for the Standard Orders Group to review the wording of paragraph 148 of Standard Form Order 8.0, namely the practice of treating failure by parents to respond to threshold as ‘deemed’ acceptance of the local authority’s threshold allegations. The Court recommended an alternative form of wording and caution that the current wording risks the unintended consequence that ‘the determination of threshold becomes more of an administrative than a judicial act’ (paragraph 57).