L (A Child) [2008] EWCA Civ 1388 (13 November 2008)

L (A Child) [2008] EWCA Civ 1388 (13 November 2008)

The appeal was allowed because the welfare decision was made on incomplete evidence, specifically the absence of input from the consultant psychiatrist Dr Ellis, whose opinion was highly relevant and potentially decisive for the child's welfare.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 1388
Parties
Subject: L (A Child); Appellant's Advocate: Ms S Shaikh; Appellant's Solicitors: Switalski's Solicitors; Respondent's Advocate: Ms S Greenan; Respondent's Solicitors: Philippa Murray & Co
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Paternity, Welfare of the Child, Expert Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Family Law Child Law Disclosure of Paternity Welfare of the Child Expert Evidence Appeal Procedure

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L (A Child)

Subject

Ms S Shaikh

Appellant's Advocate

Switalski's Solicitors

Appellant's Solicitors

Ms S Greenan

Respondent's Advocate

Philippa Murray & Co

Respondent's Solicitors

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From County Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the child should be informed of his true paternity at the beginning or end of the academic year
  2. 2 Whether the court had sufficient expert evidence to make a welfare decision

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the welfare decision was made on incomplete evidence, specifically the absence of input from the consultant psychiatrist Dr Ellis, whose opinion was highly relevant and potentially decisive for the child's welfare.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Issue to be reconsidered by HHJ Cliffe in light of further opinion and advice from a collaboration between Mr Parr and Dr Ellis.
  • Case remitted to County Court for further consideration.