F-H (Children), Re [2008] EWCA Civ 1249 (10 September 2008)

F-H (Children), Re [2008] EWCA Civ 1249 (10 September 2008)

The judge at first instance erred in refusing to conduct the fact-finding hearing regarding the sexual abuse allegations against A. The refusal was not justified by the mother's acceptance of the allegations, the possibility of criminal proceedings, or the ability of professionals to proceed on a 'worst scenario' basis. The absence of findings left the court and professionals without the necessary factual foundation to determine the optimum outcome for the children. The appeal is allowed and the order precluding the local authority from pursuing the allegations is set aside.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 1249
Parties
Appellant Local Authority: London Borough of Brent; First Respondent: Mother; Second Respondent: Father of C, D and E; Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Respondents: Children (B, C, D, E) by Children's Guardian; Intervener: A (adult sibling)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family Law Care Proceedings) / Appeal From Refusal to Conduct Fact Finding Hearing at First Instance
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of first instance judge set aside; directions given for further case management after criminal proceedings.
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Fact Finding Hearings, Threshold Criteria Under Children Act 1989, Sexual Abuse Allegations, Judicial Discretion in Family Proceedings
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Fact Finding Hearings Threshold Criteria Under Children Act 1989 Sexual Abuse Allegations Judicial Discretion in Family 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

London Borough of Brent

Appellant Local Authority

Mother

First Respondent

Father of C, D and E

Second Respondent

Children (B, C, D, E) by Children's Guardian

Third, Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Respondents

A (adult sibling)

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Law Care Proceedings) / Appeal From Refusal to Conduct Fact Finding Hearing at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge at first instance erred in refusing to conduct a fact-finding hearing regarding allegations of sexual abuse by the intervener (A) against the children
  2. 2 Whether the refusal compromised the ability of the court and professionals to determine the optimum outcome for the children
  3. 3 Whether the judge's discretion was properly exercised in declining to determine subsidiary allegations against the parents

Ratio Decidendi

The judge at first instance erred in refusing to conduct the fact-finding hearing regarding the sexual abuse allegations against A. The refusal was not justified by the mother's acceptance of the allegations, the possibility of criminal proceedings, or the ability of professionals to proceed on a 'worst scenario' basis. The absence of findings left the court and professionals without the necessary factual foundation to determine the optimum outcome for the children. The appeal is allowed and the order precluding the local authority from pursuing the allegations is set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of first instance judge set aside; directions given for further case management after criminal proceedings.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted.
  • Appeal allowed.