McC (A Child), Re [2012] EWCA Civ 166 (19 January 2012)

McC (A Child), Re [2012] EWCA Civ 166 (19 January 2012)

The application was refused because the medical evidence at trial was unanimous and conclusive that Vitamin D deficiency did not explain the injuries, the application was too late, and there was insufficient material to suggest any prospect of success. Allowing the application would have adverse consequences for the child and prospective adopters.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Civ 166
Parties
Applicant Mother: Ms G; Respondent Local Authority: Wokingham Borough Council; Second Respondent Father: Father; Third Respondent: Child via Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Permission to Adduce Fresh Evidence and Extension of Time
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Adduction of Fresh Evidence, Vitamin D Deficiency and Child Fractures, Non Accidental Injury, Expert Medical Evidence, Adoption Proceedings
Family Law Child Protection Adduction of Fresh Evidence Vitamin D Deficiency and Child Fractures Non Accidental Injury Expert Medical Evidence Adoption Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms G

Applicant Mother

Wokingham Borough Council

Respondent Local Authority

Father

Second Respondent Father

Child via Children's Guardian

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Permission to Adduce Fresh Evidence and Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence regarding Vitamin D deficiency should be admitted
  2. 2 Whether the original judgment failed to consider relevant medical evidence
  3. 3 Whether the injuries were non-accidental or explained by medical condition

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused because the medical evidence at trial was unanimous and conclusive that Vitamin D deficiency did not explain the injuries, the application was too late, and there was insufficient material to suggest any prospect of success. Allowing the application would have adverse consequences for the child and prospective adopters.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Application for extension of time refused
  • Application for permission to adduce fresh evidence refused