Re S (A Child: Findings of Fact)

Re S (A Child: Findings of Fact)

The judge's survey of the evidence lacked necessary rigour, particularly in failing to properly analyse the evolution, contamination, and consistency of K's statements, and in attributing weight to ABE interviews conducted in breach of guidance. The evidence was incapable of sustaining findings against M, and the allegations against F2 require retrial.

Parties
Appellant Mother: M; 1st Appellant: F2; Respondent Local Authority: Cornwall Council; Subject Child: C (A Child); Subject Child: K (A Child); Respondent Child's Guardian: Children’s Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (family) / Appeal From Findings of Fact in Family Court
Outcome
Appeals allowed; allegations against F2 remitted for rehearing; allegations against M dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Abuse Allegations, Failure to Protect, Fact Finding Hearings, Application of ABE Guidance, Appeal Procedure
Family Law Child Protection Sexual Abuse Allegations Failure to Protect Fact Finding Hearings Application of ABE Guidance 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Appellant Mother

F2

1st Appellant

Cornwall Council

Respondent Local Authority

C (A Child)

Subject Child

K (A Child)

Subject Child

Children’s Guardian

Respondent Child's Guardian

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (family) / Appeal From Findings of Fact in Family Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether findings of sexual abuse against F2 were properly reasoned
  2. 2 Whether findings of failure to protect against M were sustainable
  3. 3 Adequacy of adherence to ABE Guidance in interviewing child complainant

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's survey of the evidence lacked necessary rigour, particularly in failing to properly analyse the evolution, contamination, and consistency of K's statements, and in attributing weight to ABE interviews conducted in breach of guidance. The evidence was incapable of sustaining findings against M, and the allegations against F2 require retrial.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; allegations against F2 remitted for rehearing; allegations against M dismissed.

Orders

  • Allegations against F2 to be retried before a judge nominated by the Family Division Liaison Judge.
  • Specific allegations against M dismissed and will not form part of the welfare decision about C’s future.