X-Z (Children) (Fact-Finding), Re

X-Z (Children) (Fact-Finding), Re

The court found that Y’s multiple fractures occurred after discharge from hospital and were caused by excessive force by the mother, not explained by metabolic bone disease of prematurity or normal handling. The court found the father perpetrated domestic abuse and controlling behaviour towards the mother. The mother and father concealed Z’s pregnancy, placing Z at risk. The threshold for significant harm under section 31(2) Children Act 1989 was satisfied for all three children. The mother was identified as the perpetrator of the injuries on the balance of probabilities; there was no failure to protect by the non-perpetrating parent.

Parties
Applicant: A London Borough; First Respondent: The mother; Second Respondent: The father; Third Fifth Respondent: X, Y and Z (by their Children’s Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings (fact Finding) / Judgment After Fact Finding Hearing
Outcome
Findings of fact made; threshold for significant harm satisfied; identification of perpetrator (mother); no finding of failure to protect; case to proceed to welfare stage.
Legal Topics
Non Accidental Injury, Domestic Abuse, Concealment of Pregnancy, Care Orders, Threshold Criteria, Identification of Perpetrator
Family Law Child Protection Non Accidental Injury Domestic Abuse Concealment of Pregnancy Care Orders Threshold Criteria Identification of Perpetrator

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A London Borough

Applicant

The mother

First Respondent

The father

Second Respondent

X, Y and Z (by their Children’s Guardian)

Third Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings (fact Finding) / Judgment After Fact Finding Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 How did Y sustain multiple bony fractures?
  2. 2 Was there domestic abuse between the parents?
  3. 3 Did the mother/parents conceal Z’s pregnancy?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Y’s multiple fractures occurred after discharge from hospital and were caused by excessive force by the mother, not explained by metabolic bone disease of prematurity or normal handling. The court found the father perpetrated domestic abuse and controlling behaviour towards the mother. The mother and father concealed Z’s pregnancy, placing Z at risk. The threshold for significant harm under section 31(2) Children Act 1989 was satisfied for all three children. The mother was identified as the perpetrator of the injuries on the balance of probabilities; there was no failure to protect by the non-perpetrating parent.

Court Disposition

Findings of fact made; threshold for significant harm satisfied; identification of perpetrator (mother); no finding of failure to protect; case to proceed to welfare stage.

Orders

  • Findings as to non-accidental injuries to Y caused by the mother (except re-fracture)
  • Findings of domestic abuse and controlling behaviour by the father