Guardian dispute — COVID-19 vaccination — global pandemic — Care of Children Act 2004, s 5 — Evidence Act 2006, ss 7, 17, 18 & 19. The applicant and the respondent, who were two of the three guardians of a young child, disagreed on whether the child should be immunised against COVID-19. The applicant foundation applied for the child to get vaccinated, doing so on behalf of the child's caregivers who had various health problems that made them especially vulnerable to a COVID infection. The respondent, who was the child's biological mother, opposed vaccination on the grounds that the vaccine was "experimental" and unsafe. The Court found that if one of the child's caregivers fell sick with COVID this would pose a threat to the child's current living arrangements; this risk should therefore be mitigated. The weight of evidence suggested that the vaccine was safe and effective, and there was no evidence to suggest that the child would react to it badly. The Court made an order that the child get vaccinated. Judgment Date: 28 February 2022. * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * * *