Example sentences of "of [art] children [noun sg] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Protecting children will be high on the agenda , as will the full implementation of the Children Act and the UN Convention to promote childrens rights . |
| 2 | The law on school attendance acts as a rather crude instrument in this regard , although the child-centred philosophy of the Children Act 1989 extends into the area of school attendance and perhaps offers a more appropriate method of enforcing parental responsibility . |
| 3 | Whether the full extent of their concern , i.e. that local authorities should have a legal obligation to assist these young people , will become part of the Children Act 1989 is , at the time of writing , not known . |
| 4 | The decision has cast further doubt on the ability of the Children Act to deal with an important plank of child care policy — removing abusers rather than victims from the family home . |
| 5 | Assistant county secretary David Spicer said the SSD had been acting in the spirit of the Children Act by trying to avoid ‘ coercive ’ measures such as care orders . |
| 6 | The controversy centres on the extent to which a local authority can use the private law provisions of the Children Act . |
| 7 | Section 25 of the Children Act 1989 requires local authorities to obtain a youth court order to hold a child in secure accommodation for more than 72 hours in any 28 day period . |
| 8 | Section 17 of the Children Act is particularly important for travellers . |
| 9 | Which way is implementation of the Children Act going ? |
| 10 | Under the terms of the Children Act , however , responsibility for helping these children now lies with the social services child care team . |
| 11 | I am mindful that Noel Timms ' and Robert Harris ' book , Secure Accommodation in Child Care was written prior to the implementation of the Children Act 1989 and relates to research undertaken earlier ( ‘ Backs against the wall ’ , 15 April ) . |
| 12 | Section 25 of The Children Act requires local authorities to make an application for a secure accommodation in the family proceedings court not the youth court . |
| 13 | The local authority applied to the justices , under section 25 of the Children Act 1989 for an order that the child be placed in secure accommodation . |
| 14 | Held , allowing the appeal , ( 1 ) that , although the definition of ‘ family proceedings ’ in section 8 of the Children Act 1989 did not specifically refer to the provisions in Part III of the Act , the section was to be read with section 92(2) of the Act which made it clear that all applications to the justices under the Act were family proceedings ; that , accordingly , the application to the justices for a secure accommodation order under section 25 in Part III of the Act were family proceedings ; and that , therefore , the statements of evidence and the psychiatrist 's report should have been admitted in evidence in accordance with the provisions of the Children ( Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence ) Order 1991 ( post , pp. 91E–G , H — 92A ) . |
| 15 | On 23 December 1991 the justices made an order under section 25 of the Children Act 1989 by which the child should be held in secure accommodation . |
| 16 | ( 1 ) ( a ) The justices were under a duty to determine whether any relevant criteria for keeping the child in secure accommodation were satisfied , pursuant to section 25(3) of the Children Act 1989 . |
| 17 | ( 2 ) ( a ) The justices were under a duty to consider whether it was better for the child for a secure accommodation order to be made rather than no order at all being made upon the application ( in accordance with section 1(5) of the Children Act 1989 ) . |
| 18 | Although the justices were entitled to receive hearsay evidence in support of the application under section 92(2) of the Children Act 1989 , if psychiatric opinions were available , they should have been before the court in full by way of a report and/or direct evidence . |
| 19 | Whilst that order was in operation the Children Act 1989 came into force and on 4 December 1991 the local authority made application under section 25 of the Children Act 1989 for a secure accommodation order . |
| 20 | The clerk expressed the view that they contained inadmissible material because of the hearsay rule and he took the view that the evidence was inadmissible despite the relevant provisions of the Children Act 1989 designed to overcome that difficulty . |
| 21 | Apparently the clerk took the view that because section 25 applications fell within Part III of the Children Act 1989 they were not family proceedings within the meaning of the Act . |
| 22 | ‘ The justices were under a duty to consider whether it was better for the child for a secure accommodation order to be made rather than no order at all being made upon the application in accordance with section 1(5) of the Children Act . |
| 23 | Further , the magistrates should have considered the guidance and regulations in volume 1 of The Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations , vol. 1 , p. 66 , para. 5(1) . |
| 24 | This appeal presents an early opportunity in the life of the Children Act 1989 , to give what I hope is useful guidance to family proceedings courts and their clerks on the subject of findings of facts and reasons . |
| 25 | On the parents ' separation the mother initially left the four children of the marriage with the father in the former matrimonial home but on her subsequently removing one of the children the father applied ex parte for orders , including a residence order , a prohibited steps order and a specific issue order pursuant to section 8 of the Children Act 1989 requiring her to return the child and directing her not to remove any of the children from the father 's care and control . |
| 26 | The judge concluded that since rule 4.4(4) of the Family Proceedings Rules 1991did not expressly provide for the making of an application ex parte for a residence order and since section 9(5) of the Children Act 1989 prohibited him from making either a prohibited steps order or a specific issue order to achieve that result he had no jurisdiction to make the orders sought . |
| 27 | By an application dated 18 March 1992 the father applied ex parte for a prohibited steps order preventing the mother from removing the four children from the care and control of the father , a specific issue order directing the mother to return A. to the father 's care and control and not to remove him therefrom and a residence order directing that the four children live with the father and that the mother return A. to the former matrimonial home and into the father 's care , all such orders being sought pursuant to section 8 of the Children Act 1989 . |
| 28 | By a notice of appeal dated 23 March 1992 the father appealed on the grounds that ( 1 ) the judge had been wrong to conclude that he had no jurisdiction to make the orders sought and ( 2 ) having found that A. had been removed from his home with the father the judge had failed to order his return whether pursuant to section 8 of the Children Act 1989 or otherwise . |
| 29 | I consider this is the equivalent of a residence order through the back door , and do not think it appropriate to make that order when Parliament has specifically denied the right to grant ex parte applications for residence orders : see also the provisions of section 9(5) of the Children Act 1989 . |
| 30 | The justices declined to make the interim care order and made two prohibited steps orders under section 8(1) of the Children Act 1989 without giving the parties an opportunity to make representations as to whether such orders were appropriate . |