Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission v Forrest

Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission v Forrest

The defence of protecting a spouse from risk of prosecution does not amount to a reasonable excuse under Section 14A(4) of the Child Support Act 1991 for failing to provide requested information. The privilege against self-incrimination or protection of a third party is not available as a defence to a Section 14A...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission; Respondent: Dan Forrest
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Divisional Court Judgment on Appeal From Magistrates' Acquittal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; acquittal set aside; matter remitted to magistrates for further consideration of any other reasonable excuse grounds.
Legal Topics
Reasonable Excuse Defence, Self Incrimination, Child Support Enforcement, Statutory Construction, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Family Law Administrative Law Reasonable Excuse Defence Self Incrimination Child Support Enforcement Statutory Construction Appeal Procedure

Source-derived case record

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission

Appellant

Dan Forrest

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Divisional Court Judgment on Appeal From Magistrates' Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether protecting a spouse from risk of prosecution constitutes a reasonable excuse under Section 14A(4) Child Support Act 1991 for failing to provide requested information
  2. 2 Whether the privilege against self-incrimination or protection of a third party applies to requests under Section 14A

Ratio Decidendi

The defence of protecting a spouse from risk of prosecution does not amount to a reasonable excuse under Section 14A(4) of the Child Support Act 1991 for failing to provide requested information. The privilege against self-incrimination or protection of a third party is not available as a defence to a Section 14A request, as Parliament did not provide for it in that section, and authority confirms such privilege does not excuse compliance with statutory information-gathering powers.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; acquittal set aside; matter remitted to magistrates for further consideration of any other reasonable excuse grounds.

Orders

  • Matter remitted to original justices to consider whether any other reasonable excuse was advanced and, if so, to determine it.