T (A child), Re

A parent’s philosophical objection does not displace the statutory duty to register a child’s birth. The duty under the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 is an act of parental responsibility. Where a child is subject to an interim care order, the local authority may exercise its parental responsibility under section 33 of the Children Act 1989 where necessary to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. It may therefore act as a qualified informant and register the birth without a further order under section 100 or the inherent jurisdiction.

The local authority sought approval to register the birth of T, a child subject to care proceedings and an interim care order. The father opposed registration on ideological grounds, while the mother did not oppose registration by another person. The forty-two-day period for registration had expired. The central issues were whether the parents were under a legal duty to register the birth, whether the local authority could exercise its parental responsibility to do so, and whether a further order under section 100 of the Children Act 1989 or the inherent jurisdiction was required.

1. Statutory duty. Sections 1(1) and 2(1) of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 impose a legal duty on the parents to provide the required information and sign the register within 42 days. That duty is an act of parental responsibility. The position stated in Re C [2016] 3 WLR 1557 was adopted.
2. Local authority power. An interim care order gives the local authority parental responsibility. Under section 33(3)(b) of the Children Act 1989, it may determine the extent to which a parent may exercise parental responsibility, subject to the necessity requirement in section 33(4). In the circumstances, the authority could act as a qualified informant and as a person having charge of the child for the purposes of section 1(2)(d) of the 1953 Act.
3. No further authorisation required. The authority’s exercise of its existing statutory power did not require the court’s oversight or approval. An order under section 100 was inconsistent with that conclusion. The inherent jurisdiction is limited and may be invoked by a local authority only through the statutory gateway in section 100(4), consistently with London Borough of Redbridge v SNA [2015] EWHC 2140 (Fam).
4. Order. The court approved the local authority’s plan to register T’s birth under its statutory power.