F & B (Fact-Finding: Gonorrhoea) [2025] EWCA Civ 340 (28 March 2025)

F & B (Fact-Finding: Gonorrhoea) [2025] EWCA Civ 340 (28 March 2025)

The judge erred by attaching excessive weight to the mere theoretical possibility of fomite transmission, contrary to the expert evidence that sexual abuse was the likely cause of the child's infection. The judge failed to properly weigh the totality of the evidence, including the significance of lies told by X and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Civ 340
Parties
Appellant: Local Authority; First Respondent: Mother; Third Respondent: X (Mother's brother); Fourth Respondent: Grandmother (on behalf of children); Intervenor: Intervenor; Second Respondent: Second Respondent
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family Law Care Proceedings) / Appeal Judgment From Fact Finding Hearing, Remitted for Rehearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing before a different judge.
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Fact Finding Hearing, Sexual Abuse Allegations, Standard of Proof, Expert Evidence, Children Act 1989 S.31(2)
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Fact Finding Hearing Sexual Abuse Allegations Standard of Proof Expert Evidence Children Act 1989 S.31(2)

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Local Authority

Appellant

Mother

First Respondent

X (Mother's brother)

Third Respondent

Grandmother (on behalf of children)

Fourth Respondent

Intervenor

Intervenor

Second Respondent

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Law Care Proceedings) / Appeal Judgment From Fact Finding Hearing, Remitted for Rehearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in finding that gonorrhoea infection in a child was due to fomite transmission rather than sexual abuse
  2. 2 Whether the judge misapplied or misinterpreted expert medical evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to properly weigh the totality of evidence, including lies told by X and the wider canvas evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred by attaching excessive weight to the mere theoretical possibility of fomite transmission, contrary to the expert evidence that sexual abuse was the likely cause of the child's infection. The judge failed to properly weigh the totality of the evidence, including the significance of lies told by X and the wider context, and misapplied prior case law by treating a list of factors as a checklist rather than considering the unique facts. The appeal was allowed and the case remitted for rehearing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; case remitted for rehearing before a different judge.

Orders

  • Fact-finding hearing to be reheard before another judge.
  • No findings as to sexual abuse or fomite transmission are made by the appellate court.