D and A (Fact-Finding : Research Literature) [2024] EWCA Civ 663 (19 June 2024)

D and A (Fact-Finding : Research Literature) [2024] EWCA Civ 663 (19 June 2024)

The Court of Appeal held that the Family Court judge erred in her approach to the use of medical research literature as evidence, placing undue weight on research papers without sufficient expert guidance and failing to adequately distinguish between general patterns in literature and the specific facts of the case....

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Civ 663
Parties
First Appellant: Mother of D and A; Second Appellant: Father of A; First Respondent: London Borough of X (Local Authority); Second Respondent: Maternal Grandmother; Third and Fourth Respondents: Children's Guardian (for D and A)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal (care Proceedings) / Judgment on Appeal From Fact Finding in Family Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; findings of fact set aside
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Fact Finding Hearings, Use of Expert Medical Evidence, Children Act 1989 S.31, Withdrawal of Care Proceedings, Research Literature as Evidence
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Fact Finding Hearings Use of Expert Medical Evidence Children Act 1989 S.31 Withdrawal of Care Proceedings Research Literature as Evidence

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mother of D and A

First Appellant

Father of A

Second Appellant

London Borough of X (Local Authority)

First Respondent

Maternal Grandmother

Second Respondent

Children's Guardian (for D and A)

Third and Fourth Respondents

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Family Court judge erred in her approach to medical research literature as evidence in fact-finding under Children Act 1989 s.31
  2. 2 Whether the threshold for making care orders was met on the evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge's findings were sustainable given the expert evidence and family testimony

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the Family Court judge erred in her approach to the use of medical research literature as evidence, placing undue weight on research papers without sufficient expert guidance and failing to adequately distinguish between general patterns in literature and the specific facts of the case. The judge's findings that the threshold for care orders was met were not sustainable on the evidence, given the lack of consensus among experts, the weaknesses in the literature, and the absence of direct evidence of inflicted injury. The appeal was allowed and the findings set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; findings of fact set aside

Orders

  • Findings of fact made by the Family Court judge are set aside
  • No order for retrial; proceedings concluded