D & Anor (Fact-Finding: Research Literature), Re

D & Anor (Fact-Finding: Research Literature), Re

The judge erred by elevating her own analysis of medical research literature above expert evidence, failed to base findings on the totality of evidence including risk and protective factors, made findings not properly explored with parties or experts, and reversed the burden of proof; these flaws justified appellate intervention and setting aside the findings.

Parties
First Appellant: Mother of D and A; Second Appellant: Father of A; First Respondent: Local Authority; Second Respondent: Maternal Grandmother and Step-Grandfather; Third and Fourth Respondents: Children's Guardian (for Third and Fourth Respondents)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (children Act 1989) / Appeal From Fact Finding Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judge's findings set aside.
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Fact Finding, Expert Evidence, Medical Research Literature, Burden of Proof, Withdrawal of Proceedings
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Fact Finding Expert Evidence Medical Research Literature Burden of Proof Withdrawal of 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mother of D and A

First Appellant

Father of A

Second Appellant

Local Authority

First Respondent

Maternal Grandmother and Step-Grandfather

Second Respondent

Children's Guardian (for Third and Fourth Respondents)

Third and Fourth Respondents

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (children Act 1989) / Appeal From Fact Finding Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in relying on her own analysis of medical research literature
  2. 2 Whether findings were made outside the scope of evidence and submissions
  3. 3 Whether the judge reversed the burden of proof

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred by elevating her own analysis of medical research literature above expert evidence, failed to base findings on the totality of evidence including risk and protective factors, made findings not properly explored with parties or experts, and reversed the burden of proof; these flaws justified appellate intervention and setting aside the findings.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judge's findings set aside.

Orders

  • Local authority granted leave to withdraw care proceedings application.
  • Child arrangements order in respect of D remains in place.