T (Appeal: Findings of Fact), Re [2024] EWHC 3327 (Fam) (20 December 2024)

T (Appeal: Findings of Fact), Re [2024] EWHC 3327 (Fam) (20 December 2024)

The judge at first instance erred by applying criminal law concepts, specifically the defence of reasonable chastisement, to the family law fact-finding process, and by failing to focus on the factual narrative and potential harm relevant to welfare. The judge also erred in his approach to the allegation of rape by focusing on criminal law definitions rather than the factual circumstances and their impact on welfare.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 3327 (Fam)
Parties
Appellant: B; Respondent: E
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Fact Finding Hearings, Reasonable Chastisement, Physical Abuse, Sexual Abuse, Application of Criminal Law Concepts in Family Proceedings, Children Act 1989, Section 58 Children Act 2004
Family Law Fact Finding Hearings Reasonable Chastisement Physical Abuse Sexual Abuse Application of Criminal Law Concepts in Family Proceedings Children Act 1989 Section 58 Children Act 2004

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B

Appellant

E

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge at first instance erred by applying criminal law concepts, specifically the defence of reasonable chastisement, in a family law fact-finding context
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in his approach to the allegation of rape by focusing on criminal law definitions rather than the factual narrative relevant to welfare

Ratio Decidendi

The judge at first instance erred by applying criminal law concepts, specifically the defence of reasonable chastisement, to the family law fact-finding process, and by failing to focus on the factual narrative and potential harm relevant to welfare. The judge also erred in his approach to the allegation of rape by focusing on criminal law definitions rather than the factual circumstances and their impact on welfare.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside the judge's finding in relation to the alleged rape of the mother.
  • Remit the father's application for an order under the Children Act 1989 back to the Family Court in Nottingham for further case management.