L (A Child) [2009] EWCA Civ 1239 (20 August 2009)

L (A Child) [2009] EWCA Civ 1239 (20 August 2009)

The judge applied the wrong test by requiring that the DNA test be in D's best interests, rather than considering whether it would be adverse to her interests. There was insufficient evidence, particularly psychological evidence, to determine the impact on D. The order for testing was premature and should await the outcome of the fact-finding enquiry and expert evidence.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Civ 1239
Parties
First Appellant: D (by her Children's Guardian); Second Appellant: G (by his Children's Guardian); Respondent: B City Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Child Welfare / Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Bristol County Court to Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Paternity Testing, Best Interests of the Child, DNA Evidence, Case Management, Consent for Medical Procedures
Family Law Child Law Paternity Testing Best Interests of the Child DNA Evidence Case Management Consent for Medical Procedures

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D (by her Children's Guardian)

First Appellant

G (by his Children's Guardian)

Second Appellant

B City Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Welfare / Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Bristol County Court to Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should order DNA testing of a child (D) to determine the paternity of another child (G) when the putative father refuses to provide a sample
  2. 2 Whether such an order is in the best interests of the child from whom the sample is to be taken
  3. 3 Proper application of sections 20 and 21 of the Family Law Reform Act 1969

Ratio Decidendi

The judge applied the wrong test by requiring that the DNA test be in D's best interests, rather than considering whether it would be adverse to her interests. There was insufficient evidence, particularly psychological evidence, to determine the impact on D. The order for testing was premature and should await the outcome of the fact-finding enquiry and expert evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for DNA testing of D discharged
  • Application for testing adjourned to await outcome of fact-finding enquiry and directions for expert evidence