Beyond parental control
37.In the circumstances, it is not necessary for me to deal with the issue of “beyond parental control” other than to recognise the arguments raised. I recognise that I have not heard submissions to counter the arguments advanced by counsel in court. On the limited submission I have heard, I do respectfully agree with the decisions of HHJ Burrows in the Lancashire County Council v PX and Ors [2022] EWHC 2379 case; HHJ Bellamy in Re K [2013] 1 FLR 1; and Recorder Darren Howe QC in the case of Re T (A Child) [2018] EWFC B1 (which is cited by all of the parties) in which he stated as follows:“In my judgment it is immaterial whether a child is beyond parental control due to illness, impairment or for any other reason. The court simply has to consider if, on the facts, the child is beyond the control of the parent or carer. If that condition is satisfied, the court then has to determine if the child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm as a result of being beyond the control of the parent. If the answer to that second question is ‘yes’, then section 31(2)(b)(ii) threshold is, in my judgment satisfied”. Of course, beyond that, the Court needs to find that by reason of being “beyond the control of a parent”, that the child is likely to suffer significant harm. 38.I am aware that there are various authorities dealing with specific sets of circumstances (including one in which “beyond parental control” was satisfied where one parent had died and the other was not willing or able to care for the specific child), and I have already noted that I have not been addressed on any contrary arguments. Nevertheless, I do accept the submissions of the parties that most of the cases which have been before the Court involve children who are beyond parental control in that their behaviour is of concern in some way (whatever the cause of this), and not purely because of the inability of a parent to care for them. If it were otherwise, there would be a risk of conflating the two limbs of section 31. Those are separate tests, and I accept the submissions made to the court that while the cause of the child being beyond parental control may not need to be established, it should be established that the child is presenting in some way which is “beyond control”. What would qualify for this would be for another court on another day. However, in this case, there is no suggestion that the child is presenting in that way. If I had had to decide the matter (and recognising the limitations of the court not having heard arguments to the contrary), I would have accepted the submissions of the parties in relation to the second limb.