“Before I begin to deliver this judgment, I must make my most profound apologies to the transcribers who are about to have a miserable afternoon.
This is the final hearing within care proceedings. Those proceedings are issued by the Applicant Local Authority, Norfolk County Council. The social worker is Ian Manager and the team manager is Helen Child. They are represented by counsel, Mr John Respondent.
The mother of the children, Miss Evelyn Father, is represented by counsel, Ms Theresa Applicant. (There should be an acute accent over the second ‘a’ in Ms Applicant’s name, transcribers)
The next party is Mr Ian Putative – he is the birth father of all three of the children. He is represented by Mr Kent Sussex of counsel.
The fourth party is the partner of the mother, Miss Father – Mr Evelyn Mother. For a time, he was considered to be the putative father of the youngest child, but it was then established that the real father was Mr Putative. Mr Mother is an intervenor in these proceedings and is the current partner of Miss Father, and he is represented by Mrs Michelle Parents of counsel.
The fifth parties are the maternal grandparents, Gene and Jean Father. They are represented by Mr Glenn Hampshire of counsel.
The children are represented through their Guardian, Mr Isw. That name is difficult to pronounce, and unfortunately, spelling it out is also likely to contribute to some confusion, as there is an independent social worker in the case, Mr Thomas Guardian. The children – Threshold, Inherent and Jurisdiction are represented through their counsel, Mr Glynn Intervenor.
By way of crisp summary then, Mr Respondent represents the Applicant, whilst Ms Applicant represents one of the Respondents. Mr Intervenor represents the children and NOT the intervenor, who is represented by Ms Parents, who does not therefore represent the parents. The Local Authority is Norfolk, but we also have advocates named Hampshire, Kent and Sussex. Ms Child is the manager of the children’s social worker, Mr Manager.
The mother’s name is Father, her partner is Mr Mother and he was the putative father of Jurisdiction, but the real father of Jurisdiction is Mr Putative. The ISWs name is Guardian, and the Guardian’s name is Isw. Threshold is in dispute in relation to Inherent and Jurisdiction, but is not in dispute in relation to Threshold.
Helpfully, my fellow Judges allowed some additional Part 25 expert instructions for which I thank them profusely, and we therefore have a paediatric neuro-radiologist, Dr Mister, and a paediatric neurosurgeon, Mr Doctor.
In this case, the mother, Ms Father, met the father, Mr Putative, some seven years ago. They had two children together, Threshold and Inherent. The father, Mr Putative, then separated from the mother, Ms Father, who formed a relationship with Mr Mother, who it was thought for a time might be the father of Jurisdiction, though it emerged through DNA testing that he was not in fact the father of Ms Father’s baby, but that the real father was Mr Putative.
Excuse me, I’m going to rise for a few moments.
[There then follows a considerably long pause on the tape]
Thank you all for that time. The usher is disseminating amongst you some forms which I think will greatly assist. I have prepared change of name deeds for everyone. If you all sign those, for the duration of the judgment, and you can change back afterwards if so desired. ”
For those who aren’t familiar with the Who’s on first skit, here it is