l - [2025] EWHC 2230 (Fam)

The local authority’s position

In their position statement before me, the local authority say:

Part of the Local Authority’s rationale in securing the DOLs order was due to Jake having been subject to secure restrictions for a significant period and there needing to be a phased step down plan with the ability for the DOLs Order to be implemented when needed to keep Jake safe if he places himself at risk in the community.

Prior to Jake’s remand at [the detention centre], there were episodes where he went missing from placement and placed himself at risk by exposure to criminal activity. Ultimately, Jake was convicted of sexual offences against other minors.

Jake has been at [his Wrexham placement] for 3 weeks now and he has settled well with no reported incidents which is extremely positive. The Local Authority considers that Jake’s transition to the community remains in its infancy and Jake and his professional network are continuing to build trust with each other.

The Local Authority has carefully considered the position statement of the Children’s Guardian and his recommendations and conclusions that he does not support a DOLs order.

Whilst the Local Authority acknowledges this position, the concern is that Jake’s rehabilitation into the community is currently within the transitional process. Whilst statutory agencies can work together to implement a safety plan for Jake, should Jake not engage with this, there would be no legal mechanism or authority in which to prevent Jake from absconding or placing himself at risk.

The children’s Guardian has specifically raised that he believes that the Local Authority has overlooked the fact that Jake is a victim of sexual abuse. This is not accepted by the Local Authority, the Local Authority has always factored this into its planning for Jake…

The Local Authority is concerned that [the conditions of Jake’s licence] will not prevent Jake from leaving the placement and placing himself at risk of harm during the day and at this stage of his rehabilitation, the Local Authority position is that there should be a phased plan with regular reviews to review whether the restrictions can be reduced or removed. There are concerns that Jake will return to the same behaviours he engaged in prior to his remand to the secure facility without the appropriate structure and scaffolding in place.

The Local Authority is of the view that a phased step-down would be the appropriate plan, given the significant period by which Jake has been subject to a secure regime, to suddenly have a life of no restrictions without any transitional plan, could be setting Jake up to fail and could result in a further urgent application for a DOLs order should Jake go missing or put himself at risk. Placement staff and the Local Authority need to be able to respond to these situations with the appropriate legal authorisation.

The DOLs order is permissive and should only be implemented where necessary to keep Jake safe.

The Local Authority would propose a further review after 6 weeks to consider further step down and then a further review after a further 6 weeks to establish whether the order remains necessary.

The Local Authority recognises the draconian nature of the order but is concerned that Jake’s care regime could become unmanageable without the DOLs authorisation. To move from a sustained period in a secure environment to an environment free of restrictions without a step down plan could be detrimental to Jake’s welfare needs and increase the risk of him exposing himself to further harm and/or criminal activity/behaviours. There needs to be confidence in the plan, with gradual testing out of Jake having free time in the community before the restrictions can be removed completely and the Local Authority would therefore seek extension of the DOLs order for a further 6 weeks.”

These concerns were emphasised by Mr Danish Ameen, who appeared for the local authority. He pointed out that under the licensing conditions there were no restrictions on what Jake could do between 7am and 9pm, which left him vulnerable. The order was sought for only six weeks, so as to permit a stepping-down of the supervision of Jake.