Family Conference 2025: National and International Aspects of Public Children Law

Our annual Family Law Conference took place on 26 November 2025 at Inner Temple. This year we focussed on public children proceedings, looking at national and international issues which are currently impacting on the law and procedure in this area. We had a range of really interesting talks, and want to thank all of our speakers! We also want to thank all attendees for coming, listening, asking interesting and insightful questions, and spending time with us at the end of the afternoon. This is always a great event, and we are already looking forward to next year! 

After Dr Momoh's session, Adrian Gordon and Kate Smith gave an update on Deprivation of Liberty applications, particularly in respect of children. Both Counsel have strong public law practices, as well as working in the Court of Protection, and both advise on cases where the two jurisdictions overlap. 

Adrian reviewed some of the most important cases of the past year, explaining the facts, their significance, and what practitioners should consider when preparing applications. These cases were: 

• Local Authority v C & D [2025] EWHC 2753 (Fam)
• Local Authority v LB & Ors [2025] EWHC 1264
• J v Bath and North East Somerset Council & Ors [2025] EWCA Civ 478

Kate then considered the question of when a deprivation of liberty order should be used, as opposed to when a secure accommodation order is more suitable. 

After a short break for coffee and biscuits, Chris Mitropoulos spoke about open adoptions: where are we now? This is an extremely topical issue in family law. Adoption is always the solution of last resort - only used where nothing else will do - and even if a child is adopted it may be important for that child to maintain contact with their birth family - particularly with siblings.

There has been a meaningful shift in the approach of the courts to open adoption, and the judge will look at whether contact with a family member is essential or desirable. The template for contact is set at the placement order stage. The frequency of contact is not uniform and must be tailored to the child’s needs, and sibling contact is given priority.

If the court is not willing to make an order in a particular case, it can make use of recitals instead which may provide a route to setting expectations when orders are not made.

Our conference ended with a session from Trisan Hyatt who spoke about a trauma informed family court, and the effects and consequences of trauma in family court proceedings. 

Trauma, in the sense of a sudden and forceful event that overwhelms a person's ability to respond to it (whether or not that involves physical harm), can arise at all stages of family court proceedings. A person may be suffering trauma from past experiences; may suffer trauma in the situation which precipitates the proceedings; may suffer trauma during the course of the proceedings; or after they have ended. There is a lot of research suggesting that participants in the family justice system may well have suffered or be suffering from trauma during and after their proceedings. 

Trisan spoke compassionately about what family practitioners can do to recognise and try to minimise trauma during proceedings whilst still ensuring that clients are heard, listened to, and able to effectively participate. She also spoke about the work of the Trauma-Informed Working Group of the Family Justice Council and how to feed into the work that they are doing. The overriding message is that we need to contribute concrete suggestions, not general sympathy.