C (A Child Sexual Abuse), Re [2018] EWFC B92 (17 April 2018)

C (A Child Sexual Abuse), Re [2018] EWFC B92 (17 April 2018)

On the balance of probabilities, Y was found to have perpetrated two non-accidental, sexually motivated injuries to C, supported by expert medical evidence and the credible account of X. The court found no sufficient evidence that X failed to protect C, particularly regarding the semen allegation, due to confusion and lack of objective corroboration.

Citation
[2018] EWFC B92
Parties
Applicant/mother: X; Respondent/father: Y; Child (son of X) / Witness: Z; Child (daughter of X and Y) / Subject Child: C; Applicant: LA (Local Authority)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Family Law Care Proceedings (fact Finding Hearing) / Fact Finding Judgment
Outcome
Findings made against Y for sexual assault of C; no finding against X for failure to protect.
Legal Topics
Sexual Abuse Allegations, Fact Finding Hearing, Threshold Criteria, Failure to Protect, Expert Medical Evidence
Family Law Child Protection Sexual Abuse Allegations Fact Finding Hearing Threshold Criteria Failure to Protect Expert Medical Evidence

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Applicant/mother

Y

Respondent/father

Z

Child (son of X) / Witness

C

Child (daughter of X and Y) / Subject Child

LA (Local Authority)

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Family Law Care Proceedings (fact Finding Hearing) / Fact Finding Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Y sexually assaulted C
  2. 2 Whether X failed to protect C from harm

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities, Y was found to have perpetrated two non-accidental, sexually motivated injuries to C, supported by expert medical evidence and the credible account of X. The court found no sufficient evidence that X failed to protect C, particularly regarding the semen allegation, due to confusion and lack of objective corroboration.

Court Disposition

Findings made against Y for sexual assault of C; no finding against X for failure to protect.

Orders

  • Short adjournment for parties to reflect on conclusions and for further assessments to proceed.