A and B (children: expert’s reports), Re

A and B (children: expert’s reports), Re

The judge failed to identify any proper basis or specific issues that rendered the appointment of a psychologist necessary under s.13 Children and Families Act 2014. The exhaustion of other options and general hope for progress do not meet the statutory necessity threshold. The appeal is allowed and the order appointing the psychologist is set aside.

Parties
Subject Child: A (child); Subject Child: B (child); Appellant: Mother; Respondent: Father; Interested Party: Children's Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Children Act Proceedings / Appeal Against Case Management Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order appointing psychologist set aside
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Children Act Proceedings, Parental Alienation, Case Management, Appeals
Family Law Expert Evidence Children Act Proceedings Parental Alienation Case Management Appeals

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A (child)

Subject Child

B (child)

Subject Child

Mother

Appellant

Father

Respondent

Children's Guardian

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Family Law Children Act Proceedings / Appeal Against Case Management Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointment of a psychologist for a family assessment was necessary under s.13 Children and Families Act 2014
  2. 2 Whether the judge properly applied the necessity test for expert evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge identified specific issues requiring expert input

Ratio Decidendi

The judge failed to identify any proper basis or specific issues that rendered the appointment of a psychologist necessary under s.13 Children and Families Act 2014. The exhaustion of other options and general hope for progress do not meet the statutory necessity threshold. The appeal is allowed and the order appointing the psychologist is set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order appointing psychologist set aside

Orders

  • Paragraphs 4-8, 10, and 13 of the order are set aside
  • References to Dr Hardiman in paragraphs 12 and 14 are removed