Re C & Ors (Care Proceedings: Fact Finding)

Re C & Ors (Care Proceedings: Fact Finding)

The judge was entitled to find that the s.31 threshold was crossed because, on the evidence and adverse inferences from the adults' dishonesty, any accidental cause of H's injury was likely attributable to deficient parenting, and the risk of future harm to all children was established. The judge's reasoning, though distributed across several documents, was sufficiently clear and justified the findings. The appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: C and Others; First Respondent: Local Authority; Second Respondent: Father; Intervenor: A (eldest adult child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal (care Proceedings) / Judgment on Appeal From Fact Finding in Family Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Fact Finding Hearings, Section 31 Children Act Threshold, Attribution of Harm, Case Management, Domestic Violence, Delay in Judgment, Burden of Proof
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Fact Finding Hearings Section 31 Children Act Threshold Attribution of Harm Case Management Domestic Violence +2 more

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C and Others

Appellant

Local Authority

First Respondent

Father

Second Respondent

A (eldest adult child)

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Appeal (care Proceedings) / Judgment on Appeal From Fact Finding in Family Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the findings of fact and threshold determination under s.31 Children Act 1989 were justified
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in attributing harm to unreasonable parental care when unable to determine if injury was inflicted or accidental
  3. 3 Whether the judge's reasoning and process were procedurally fair and sufficiently clear

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find that the s.31 threshold was crossed because, on the evidence and adverse inferences from the adults' dishonesty, any accidental cause of H's injury was likely attributable to deficient parenting, and the risk of future harm to all children was established. The judge's reasoning, though distributed across several documents, was sufficiently clear and justified the findings. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Findings of fact and threshold determination under s.31 Children Act 1989 upheld
  • No order for rehearing or substitution of findings