Health Service Executive -v- B & anor (Lifting In Camera Rule)

JudgeToale J.
Judgment Date28 May 2013
Neutral Citation[2013] IEDC 13
Case OutcomeApproved
Date28 May 2013
CourtDistrict Court (Ireland)
[2013] IEDC 13
AN CHUIRT DUICHE THE DISTRICT COURT
HEALTH SERVICE EXECUTIVE
APPLICANT
-AND-
B & R
RESPONDENTS
CHILD CARE ACT 1991— SECTION 47
IN THE MATTER OF CHILD 1
28 May 2013
1. On 27 January 2012, the applicant issued an application for a c are order with respect to Child 1, pursuant to sec tion 18 of the
Child Care Act 1991 (the CCA). This application has not been heard. On the same date, the applicant also issued an a pplication for an
interim care order with respec t to Child 1, pursuant to sec tion 17 of the CCA. T his application was heard on 16 Fe bruary 2012, when
an interim care order was granted to expire on 22 March 2012. The Guardian Ad Litem (“GAL”) was also appointed on that date. On 22
March 2012, and on various subsequent dat es, t he applicant applied for extensions of the initial interim care order, whic h have been
granted. The latest extension of the interim care order is due t o expire on 18 June 2013. The applications under sec tion 17 and
sect ion 18 of the CCA are hereinafter referred to as “the proce edings”.
2. Child 1 has remained in the ca re of the applicant c ontinuously since the granting of the initial interim care order.
3. On 24 July 2012, the GAL issued an application under the CCA (hereinafter c alled “the applicat ion”). This application is headed “In
the matter of [Child 1]”, names the GAL as Applicant, the mother as first named respondent, the HSE as t hird named respondent, and
the fat her as a not ice party. The s econd named respondent is T, the fa ther of Child 1’s half brother (Child 2). The application sought
two subst antive orders, in the following terms:
“1. An order under s47 of the [CCA] direct ing that the c onsent of the first and seco nd named respondents (i.e. the
mother and T) be dispensed with f or the purpose of e nabling the GAL to inspect the files of Child 2 held by any and
all work departments of the t hird named respondent (i.e the HSE).
and/or
2. An order under Order 46A of t he rules of the District Court direct ing the third named respondent (i.e the HSE) to
make discovery of any rec ords in the power posses sion or procurement of any and all of its s ocial work departments
conc erning Child 2”.
Counsel for the GAL indicated in the course of the hearing that the GAL was not pressing the applicat ion under Order 46A unless her
application under sect ion 47 was unsucc essful.
Counsel for the GAL the indicat ed in the c ourse of t he hearing that t he GAL might limit the application to information on social work
department files relating to child protec tion and welfare incidents involving mother.
4. The applicat ion ultimately c ame on for hearing on 31 January 2013. The father of Child 1, who was a notic e party to the
application, chose not t o take part and was neither present nor represented. The applicant and eac h of the respondents t o the
application were represented by counsel and made written and oral submissions.
5. The f irst social work report submitted to t he court (dated 3 F ebruary 2012) in connection with t he proceedings c ontained, inter
alia, the following:
“Referral 2.
On 26/08/2009, Child 2’s father cont act ed the s ocial work department. He informed the Duty S ocial Worker that
[Child 2] was staying at his paternal grandmother’s house … as [Child 2]’s mother had hit him. The Duty Social
Worker spoke with [mother] on this date and she admitted t hat she had hit [Child 2], causing him injury. HSE/Garda
Notifications regarding this incident were c ompleted as c onfirmed.
On 04.09.2009 proceedings under the Guardianship of Infants Ac t 1964 were brought before t he District Court and
interim cust ody of [Child 2] was aw arded to [Child 2’s father], with familial acc ess to take place in [mother]’s home,
under supervision. The proceedings were adjourned until 15/10/2009 and this department was direc ted by t he c ourt
to provide an Interim Report under s20 of t he CCA.
This report was present ed to the Court on 15/10/2009 and an interim cust ody order was granted, giving custody of
[Child 2] to [the fa ther]. Procee dings were adjourned until 14/01/2010, pending the completion of a full report by
the HSE. [The father] was granted c ustody of [Child 2].”
Subsequent soc ial work reports prepared in the proceedings have st ated t hat t hey should be read “in conjunct ion with previous
reports”, including the report of 3 F ebruary 2012.
6. It is c lear from the submissions of the part ies, and from the oral argument in the case, that the report(s) prepared under section
20 of the CCA in the private law proc eedings in 2009 fall within the scope of the applicat ion.
7. The GAL submits that t he information sought by her relates to allegations of physical and se xual abuse by mother of Child 2, which
are denied by mother. The GAL says t hat mother has made some admissions in the course of evidence in t he Circuit Court which w as
hearing an appeal against orders made in these proceedings. The GAL submits that there are disc repancies or c onflicts bet ween the

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT