Restricting use of wardship CA 1989 s. 100
CA 1989 s. 100 stops local authorities from using wardship or inherent jurisdiction to place children in care without leave and proof of significant harm.
Section 7 of the Family Law Reform Act 1969 (which gives the High Court power to place a ward of court in the care, or under the supervision, of a local authority) shall cease to have effect. No court shall exercise the High Court’s inherent jurisdiction with respect to children— so as to require a child to be placed in the care, or put under the supervision, of a local authority; so as to require a child to be accommodated by or on behalf of a local authority; so as to make a child who is the subject of a care order a ward of court; or for the purpose of conferring on any local authority power to determine any question which has arisen, or which may arise, in connection with any aspect of parental responsibility for a child. No application for any exercise of the court’s inherent jurisdiction with respect to children may be made by a local authority unless the authority have obtained the leave of the court. The court may only grant leave if it is satisfied that— the result which the authority wish to achieve could not be achieved through the making of any order of a kind to which subsection (5) applies; and there is reasonable cause to believe that if the court’s inherent jurisdiction is not exercised with respect to the child he is likely to suffer significant harm. This subsection applies to any order— made otherwise than in the exercise of the court’s inherent jurisdiction; and which the local authority is entitled to apply for (assuming, in the case of any application which may only be made with leave, that leave is granted).
Text in force at .
Source: legislation.gov.uk — The National Archives (legislation.gov.uk), reproduced under licence Open Government Licence v3.0.
What it actually says
Section 100 restricts local authorities from using the High Court's inherent jurisdiction—including wardship—to place a child into local authority care or supervision, require a child to be accommodated by a local authority, make a child under a care order a ward of court, or confer power on a council regarding parental responsibility.
A local authority must obtain court leave before applying for any exercise of inherent jurisdiction with respect to a child. The court can only grant leave if the council's desired result cannot be achieved by another order under subsection (5) for which the authority could apply, and there is reasonable cause to believe the child is likely to suffer significant harm if the inherent jurisdiction is not exercised.
This provision also repeals Section 7 of the Family Law Reform Act 1969, removing the High Court's previous statutory power to place a ward of court into local authority care or supervision.
When it applies
- A local council attempting to turn a child who is already subject to a care order into a ward of court.
- A local authority seeking court leave to use High Court inherent jurisdiction because no standard statutory order can prevent significant harm to a child.
- A local authority attempting to use inherent jurisdiction to require a child to be accommodated by the council.
What this section does not say
- Private wardship applications brought by family members or individuals who are not local authorities.
- Standard applications by a local authority for care or supervision orders under regular statutory care proceedings.
- Emergency protection measures pursued under standard statutory child protection provisions.
That's the law. Now let's settle your problem.
Say what is happening. A neutral mediator hears your side and the other party's, and walks you both to a written agreement. In the advanced settings you can ask for the decision to be reasoned on the Acts of Parliament that apply in England and Wales.
Or open a session directly and invite the other party.
We copy this text from the official publisher and re-check it against that source on every page load, but we cannot guarantee it is complete, current or free of error, and we accept no liability for any reliance on it. An amendment can take effect before a consolidation catches up. The publisher's own copy is linked below; where the two differ, it is the official one that counts.
This page reproduces the text of CA 1989 s. 100 in force at the date shown and explains it in general terms. It is not legal advice and takes no account of the circumstances of your case, which can change the answer completely. For a live dispute, for limitation periods, and before taking any step in court, consult a qualified lawyer in England and Wales.