BCC v FZ & Ors [2012] EWHC 1154 (Fam) (03 April 2012)

BCC v FZ & Ors [2012] EWHC 1154 (Fam) (03 April 2012)

The risk of significant harm to the child from disclosure of confidential police material outweighs the parents' right to see and respond to the evidence; public interest immunity applies, and a blanket ban on disclosure is necessary at this stage. A special advocate should be appointed to protect the parents' rights going forward.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 1154 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant: BCC; 1st Respondent: FZ; 2nd Respondent: AZ; 3rd Respondent: HZ; 4th Respondent: TVP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Care Proceedings / Interlocutory Hearing on Disclosure and Public Interest Immunity
Outcome
Application for non-disclosure upheld; public interest immunity applies; blanket ban on disclosure of confidential police material to parents.
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Public Interest Immunity, Special Advocate Appointment, Children Act Proceedings
Family Law Child Protection Disclosure Public Interest Immunity Special Advocate Appointment Children Act Proceedings

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BCC

Applicant

FZ

1st Respondent

AZ

2nd Respondent

HZ

3rd Respondent

TVP

4th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Care Proceedings / Interlocutory Hearing on Disclosure and Public Interest Immunity

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether confidential police material should be disclosed to parents in care proceedings
  2. 2 Whether public interest immunity applies to police material
  3. 3 Whether a special advocate should be appointed

Ratio Decidendi

The risk of significant harm to the child from disclosure of confidential police material outweighs the parents' right to see and respond to the evidence; public interest immunity applies, and a blanket ban on disclosure is necessary at this stage. A special advocate should be appointed to protect the parents' rights going forward.

Court Disposition

Application for non-disclosure upheld; public interest immunity applies; blanket ban on disclosure of confidential police material to parents.

Orders

  • Attorney General invited to appoint a Special Advocate to represent parents' interests in future disclosure and proceedings.
  • Provision for an open hearing as soon as practicable to plan procedural way forward.