O & M (Children) [2006] EWCA Civ 1367 (30 August 2006)

O & M (Children) [2006] EWCA Civ 1367 (30 August 2006)

Despite the lack of evidence of bruising, the totality of the evidence—including the child's consistent statements, the timing of the injury, the father's lack of explanation, and the judge's assessment of witness credibility—was sufficient to support the finding that the father caused the fracture by kicking. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] EWCA Civ 1367
Parties
Appellant: Father; First Respondent: Kingston-upon-Hull City Council (Local Authority); Second Respondent: Mother; Third Respondent: Stepfather; Fourth Respondent: Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal (care Proceedings) / Appeal Against Fact Finding Judgment in Care Proceedings
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Non Accidental Injury, Fact Finding, Children Act 1989 S.31, Expert Medical Evidence
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Non Accidental Injury Fact Finding Children Act 1989 S.31 Expert Medical Evidence

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Father

Appellant

Kingston-upon-Hull City Council (Local Authority)

First Respondent

Mother

Second Respondent

Stepfather

Third Respondent

Guardian

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (care Proceedings) / Appeal Against Fact Finding Judgment in Care Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in finding that the father caused a fracture to his son by kicking him despite lack of evidence of bruising
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to properly address or summarise the medical evidence regarding bruising and causation
  3. 3 Whether the finding was unsafe and should be set aside

Ratio Decidendi

Despite the lack of evidence of bruising, the totality of the evidence—including the child's consistent statements, the timing of the injury, the father's lack of explanation, and the judge's assessment of witness credibility—was sufficient to support the finding that the father caused the fracture by kicking. The medical evidence did not exclude the possibility of a fracture without bruising, and the judge was entitled to reach his conclusion on the balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order for costs save for detailed assessment of the mother's, father's, stepfather's and guardian's publicly funded costs.