A teenage mother will today resume the battle to keep her newborn baby after social workers made a second attempt to remove him from her care.

The mother, known as G, spent the night in hospital with her son under close supervision after magistrates yesterday failed to reach a verdict on whether the boy should be placed with foster parents.

The 18-year-old was reunited with her baby on Wednesday after the dramatic intervention of a High Court judge. In an extraordinary ruling, the judge ordered that the baby boy born in the early hours of Wednesday morning and removed by social workers should be returned immediately.

Solicitors for the mother presented evidence suggesting that social workers had acted without any legal authority, and argued the mother did not represent a threat to the child.

But social workers at Nottingham City Council yesterday applied for an “interim care order”, which almost always means the child being removed.

The mother was taken into the care system herself after running away from home and suffers from mental health problems. Neither she nor the baby can be named for legal reasons.

Last night, Nottingham City Council released a statement saying that lawyers would return to court this morning. “We have been in court all day. We’re happy that there is appropriate protection overnight for the baby who is our primary concern in this case,” it said.

On Wednesday the High Court judge, Mr Justice Munby, said that social workers had “on the face of it” broken the law by insisting that the mother and child be separated without first obtaining a court order and “should have known better”.

Family rights campaigners say that social workers are increasingly jumping the gun and removing babies from their mothers to try to increase their adoption figures. It is much easier to find new families for new babies than older children.

Official data show the number of babies taken into care rose to 2,800 in 2005 from just 1,600 in 1995. Social workers say they are intervening more quickly in cases where there is evidence that a baby could come to harm.

Experts say it would be very unusual for social workers not to follow the procedures laid down in law.

John Coughlan, head of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services, said he had never come across a case where social workers acted in the way alleged in this case.

“I have never encountered a case where there has, apparently, been a failure of process of the type the court intervened on. If that occurred, it would be extraordinary as everything is process-led with numerous checks and balances,” he said. Social workers were criticised yesterday in a government-commissioned report for failings in dealing with dozens of at-risk children who subsequently died or were seriously injured. Researchers from the University of East Anglia looked at 161 serious cases of child abuse and neglect between April 2003 and March 2005. Two thirds of the children died and the rest suffered serious injuries. Nearly half involved babies under 12 months old.

Caring formula

1,400 newborn babies taken into care in 2005-06, compared with 540 in 1995

2,800 children under 12 months taken into care in 2005 compared with 1,600 in 1995

2,700 number of children adopted in 2000

40% percentage increase in adoptions demanded by Tony Blair in 2006

3,700 number of children adopted in 2006, an increase of 37 per cent on 2000

£18m payout shared by 30 local authorities for meeting the target to increase adoptions in their areas

35 number of children killed by a parent in England and Wales each year

Source: Government departments, NSPCC

Times recommends

• Ask me about sex, not pay
• Culture clubbing
• Honor Blackman: Words from the wise