M and Z (Children), Re

M and Z (Children), Re

No findings of fact were made in previous proceedings regarding the causation of Z’s skull fracture. Even if findings had been made, new evidence (statements by M and further injury to Z) constitutes solid grounds for reopening the issue. The court can and should determine causation and related issues in current proceedings.

Parties
Applicant: A Local Authority; 1st Respondent (mother): YS; 2nd Respondent (father): ZI; Respondent Children: M and Z
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Care Order Application / Interlocutory Judgment on Whether Factual Causation of Injury Can Be Determined in Current Proceedings
Outcome
Court will consider causation of Z’s skull fracture and related issues in current proceedings; previous proceedings did not determine causation.
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Withdrawal of Proceedings, Res Judicata, Fact Finding, Threshold Criteria, Children Act 1989
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Withdrawal of Proceedings Res Judicata Fact Finding Threshold Criteria Children Act 1989

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A Local Authority

Applicant

YS

1st Respondent (mother)

ZI

2nd Respondent (father)

M and Z

Respondent Children

Procedural Posture

Care Order Application / Interlocutory Judgment on Whether Factual Causation of Injury Can Be Determined in Current Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can lawfully consider the causation of Z’s skull fracture in current proceedings
  2. 2 Whether findings of fact were made in previous proceedings
  3. 3 Whether principles of res judicata or issue estoppel prevent reconsideration of causation

Ratio Decidendi

No findings of fact were made in previous proceedings regarding the causation of Z’s skull fracture. Even if findings had been made, new evidence (statements by M and further injury to Z) constitutes solid grounds for reopening the issue. The court can and should determine causation and related issues in current proceedings.

Court Disposition

Court will consider causation of Z’s skull fracture and related issues in current proceedings; previous proceedings did not determine causation.

Orders

  • Requests for clarification or reconsideration of this judgment invited from parties.
  • Further submissions invited regarding extent of investigation and Part 25 application.