C & Ors, Re (Care Proceedings: Fact-Finding) [2023] EWCA Civ 38 (26 January 2023)

C & Ors, Re (Care Proceedings: Fact-Finding) [2023] EWCA Civ 38 (26 January 2023)

The Court of Appeal held that the judge's findings that the s.31 threshold was crossed were justified on the evidence, even though the precise cause of H's injuries (deliberate or accidental) could not be determined, because the harm was attributable to parental care not being what it would be reasonable to expect, and the lack of honesty from the adults prevented safeguarding. The judge's approach to case management and reliance on background allegations was within her discretion. The appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Civ 38
Parties
Appellant(s): C and Others; First Respondent: Local Authority; Second Respondent: Father (Second Respondent); Intervenor: A (Intervenor)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal (care Proceedings Fact Finding) / Judgment on Appeal From Family Court (fact Finding Stage)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Fact Finding Hearings, Section 31 Children Act 1989 Threshold, Physical Harm to Children, Domestic Abuse, Case Management, Judicial Reasoning
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Fact Finding Hearings Section 31 Children Act 1989 Threshold Physical Harm to Children Domestic Abuse Case Management +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C and Others

Appellant(s)

Local Authority

First Respondent

Father (Second Respondent)

Second Respondent

A (Intervenor)

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Appeal (care Proceedings Fact Finding) / Judgment on Appeal From Family Court (fact Finding Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the s.31 Children Act 1989 threshold for significant harm was crossed in respect of the children
  2. 2 Whether the fact-finding judge erred in law or process in her findings regarding the cause of H's injuries and the risk of future harm
  3. 3 Whether the judge's approach to unproven allegations and case management was legally correct

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the judge's findings that the s.31 threshold was crossed were justified on the evidence, even though the precise cause of H's injuries (deliberate or accidental) could not be determined, because the harm was attributable to parental care not being what it would be reasonable to expect, and the lack of honesty from the adults prevented safeguarding. The judge's approach to case management and reliance on background allegations was within her discretion. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Findings of fact and threshold determination under s.31 Children Act 1989 upheld
  • No order for rehearing; original findings stand