H (Children: Expertise of Witness)

There was no serious procedural or other irregularity in the instruction or evidence of Mr Flatman. He was a regulated educational psychologist and chartered by the BPS, and the assessment of the family was within his expertise. Even if there were procedural shortcomings, they did not render the proceedings unjust. The judge’s decision was securely based on the whole of the evidence, not solely on Mr Flatman’s opinion.

Parties: Appellant: Appellant Mother; Respondent Local Authority: Lincolnshire County Council; Second Respondent Father: Second Respondent Father; Respondent Children: Respondent Children (by Children’s Guardian); Third Respondent Father: Third Respondent Father (F2)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 03 December 2026
Procedural Posture: Appeal (family Care Orders) / Judgment on Appeal From Family Court
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Expert Evidence, Care Orders, Procedural Irregularity, Qualifications of Expert Witnesses

Family Law Child Protection Expert Evidence Care Orders Procedural Irregularity Qualifications of Expert Witnesses

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2

Parties

Appellant Mother

Appellant

Lincolnshire County Council

Respondent Local Authority

Second Respondent Father

Respondent Children (by Children’s Guardian)

Respondent Children

Third Respondent Father (F2)

Third Respondent Father

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Care Orders) / Judgment on Appeal From Family Court

Legal Issues

1 Whether the care orders should be set aside due to reliance on an expert psychologist allegedly acting outside his expertise
2 Whether there was a serious procedural or other irregularity in the Family Court proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed