R (Children: Findings of Fact), Re

R (Children: Findings of Fact), Re

The judge failed to properly evaluate all the evidence, did not provide clear reasons for rejecting the family’s account, and erred in separating the findings of inflicted injury and collusion. The judge’s reasoning did not sustain his conclusions, and the demanding test for appellate interference with findings of fact was met. The appeal is allowed, the findings of fact are set aside, and the supervision orders are discharged.

Parties
Appellant: Appellant Mother; Respondent: Respondent Local Authority; Respondent: Respondent Father; Respondent: Respondent Children by their Children’s Guardian; Intervener: Five Interveners
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family/care Proceedings) / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Findings of Fact, Care Proceedings, Threshold Criteria, Assessment of Evidence, Collusion, Standard of Proof
Family Law Child Protection Findings of Fact Care Proceedings Threshold Criteria Assessment of Evidence Collusion Standard of Proof

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant Mother

Appellant

Respondent Local Authority

Respondent

Respondent Father

Respondent

Respondent Children by their Children’s Guardian

Respondent

Five Interveners

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family/care Proceedings) / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in his assessment of the family’s evidence regarding the cause of child C’s injuries
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to properly evaluate the improbability of inflicted injury and subsequent collusion
  3. 3 Whether the judge’s findings on infliction and collusion were sustainable on the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge failed to properly evaluate all the evidence, did not provide clear reasons for rejecting the family’s account, and erred in separating the findings of inflicted injury and collusion. The judge’s reasoning did not sustain his conclusions, and the demanding test for appellate interference with findings of fact was met. The appeal is allowed, the findings of fact are set aside, and the supervision orders are discharged.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The findings of fact made by His Honour Judge Chaudhuri are set aside.