TV Edwards has secured an order for their client, declaring that the Article 8 ECHR rights of a significantly disabled child were breached by her local authority, Northumberland County Council (“NCC”), by unlawfully issuing care proceedings and requiring the child’s mother and siblings to leave the family home while the care proceedings were ongoing. The court’s order also records that changes made to the child’s bespoke care and education package while care proceedings were ongoing had a negative impact on her and caused her significant distress. A substantial damages settlement of £50,000 has also been agreed.

We acted for Ella Chapple, a child with complex disabilities and needs, including deafblindness, learning disabilities and WAGR syndrome. Acting via Ella’s mother and litigation friend Elly Chapple, we brought a claim against NCC alleging that care proceedings, brought by NCC in April 2020, were unnecessary and disproportionate for a variety of reasons, including that:

• relevant professionals had agreed, at a meeting to discuss concerns, only two weeks before care proceedings were issued, that there was no cause to even place Ella on a child protection plan (a step often taken as a less intrusive alternative to care proceedings), let alone issue care proceedings;
• fresh allegations and concerns communicated to NCC after that meeting were simply accepted and not properly investigated or scrutinised, despite the individual who made those allegations having attended the meeting and stating they had no concerns;
• Ella’s parents were sent a letter prior to issuing care proceedings, stating that following the meeting, NCC had tried to work with them to improve matters, but that this had not been successful. However, NCC were unable to identify any work that had been attempted in the short space of time between the meeting and the decision to issue care proceedings.

The claim also pleaded that changes made to Ella’s care and education package while care proceedings were ongoing from April 2020 – December 2020 were inappropriate and caused Ella significant distress. She is entitled to a bespoke, wraparound package of education and care as ordered by the SEND Tribunal in 2017, comprising a “Waking Day Curriculum”, delivered by a dedicated team of trained intervenors, in a manner suited to Ella’s needs. This includes:

• Ensuring that communication with Ella involves signing as well as verbal communication;
• Ensuring that Ella’s day is well structured and defined by routine, with Ella being given advance notice of any changes or one-off activities so that she is prepared and not unduly distressed by any such changes; and
• A compassionate and reassuring approach when Ella is agitated or upset, to minimise the risk of any episodes of self-harm, and their impact if and when they occur.

While the care proceedings were ongoing, NCC unilaterally arranged for its own in-house care service to oversee and implement Ella’s education and care package, who in turn dictated radically different approaches to Ella’s care, with no appropriate expert input sought from Multi-Sensory Impairment (“MSI”) professionals as to whether such changes would be appropriate for Ella’s needs. The care service did not have any experience or expertise in deafblindness, but the changes it made included:

• reducing or stopping Ella from going on regular drives in the car, something that had been proven to be a calming, self-regulating process for her;
• ignoring Ella when she was agitated or upset until she stopped (resulting in Ella’s behaviour escalating and increased frequency and severity of self-harm); and
• introducing changes to Ella’s schedule with little or no notice.

Following the serving of civil proceedings in May 2022, alleging that all of the above breached Ella’s human rights, the parties were able to reach agreement in September 2024 that Ella’s human rights were indeed breached by NCC inappropriately issuing care proceedings, and that the changes made to Ella’s care package, as well as NCC’s requirement that Ella’s mother and siblings leave the family home while care proceedings were ongoing, had a detrimental effect on Ella.

This was an important, and novel, case, which, it is hoped, will have ramifications for the community of parents with disabled children, who often experience significant challenges and difficulties in obtaining support, and subsequent disproportionate and unnecessary intrusion into their family and private lives. This trend was outlined in a major research report published in July 2021, and it is hoped that this case will help to continue to highlight the issues raised. This may be of particular relevance in light of the ongoing review and consultation by the Law Commission regarding the legal framework governing social care for disabled children in England, which has a stated aim of helping children with disabilities to access the support they need.

Shaun Livingston, Ella’s solicitor, said “I am glad that we were able to secure some form of redress for Ella and her family – what happened to Ella should not have happened, and while this case cannot undo that, I am pleased that the local authority has at least recognised that things went wrong. I hope Ella’s case can help prevent repeat occurrences for other families”.

Ella was represented by Shaun Livingston of TV Edwards, and Steve Broach KC and Victoria-Butler Cole KC of 39 Essex Chambers

Disclaimer: The information on the TV Edwards website is for general information only and reflects the position at the date of publication.