A (A Child), Re (No 2)

A (A Child), Re (No 2)

The appellate court found that, save for certain specific findings (notably regarding the father's alleged attempt to use the mother's mental health for financial gain and threats by the paternal grandfather), the trial judge's findings were supported by evidence, properly reasoned, and not vitiated by legal error or procedural unfairness. The judge was entitled to make the findings he did, having had the advantage of hearing the witnesses, and the appellate court would not substitute its own view of the evidence.

Parties
Subject Child: A (A Child); Appellant (father): [Father's Name Not Provided]; Respondent (mother): [Mother's Name Not Provided]
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Family Appeal / Appeal From Fact Finding Hearing in Wardship Proceedings
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part
Legal Topics
Wardship, Fact Finding Hearing, Domestic Violence, Sexual Abuse, Child Welfare, Appeal Procedure
Family Law Child Law Wardship Fact Finding Hearing Domestic Violence Sexual Abuse Child Welfare 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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A (A Child)

Subject Child

[Father's Name Not Provided]

Appellant (father)

[Mother's Name Not Provided]

Respondent (mother)

Procedural Posture

Family Appeal / Appeal From Fact Finding Hearing in Wardship Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's findings of fact, particularly regarding allegations of sexual and physical abuse, were supported by evidence and proper reasoning
  2. 2 Whether the judge's approach to credibility, speculation, and cultural context was legally correct
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness was observed in the fact-finding process

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court found that, save for certain specific findings (notably regarding the father's alleged attempt to use the mother's mental health for financial gain and threats by the paternal grandfather), the trial judge's findings were supported by evidence, properly reasoned, and not vitiated by legal error or procedural unfairness. The judge was entitled to make the findings he did, having had the advantage of hearing the witnesses, and the appellate court would not substitute its own view of the evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused on Grounds 5 and 7
  • Permission to appeal granted but appeal dismissed on Grounds 1, 2, 8, and 9