In the matter of R-E (Children)

In the matter of R-E (Children)

The judge was entitled to determine the rehearing applications at the directions hearing as all parties had notice, no party requested an adjournment or further evidence, and the judge had sufficient information to conclude that there were no solid grounds for revisiting the findings. The new evidence regarding Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome did not provide a real reason to doubt the original findings, and procedural fairness was not breached.

Parties
Appellant: Mother; Appellant: Father; Respondent: Local Authority; Respondent: Guardian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal Family Law (care Proceedings) / Appeal From Family Court Decision Refusing Rehearing and Expert Evidence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Care Proceedings, Rehearing Applications, Expert Evidence, Procedural Fairness
Family Law Child Protection Care Proceedings Rehearing Applications Expert Evidence Procedural Fairness

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mother

Appellant

Father

Appellant

Local Authority

Respondent

Guardian

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Family Law (care Proceedings) / Appeal From Family Court Decision Refusing Rehearing and Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge was entitled to refuse a rehearing of care proceedings at a directions hearing
  2. 2 Whether the judge had sufficient information to determine the application for a rehearing
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness was observed in the summary disposal of the rehearing applications

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to determine the rehearing applications at the directions hearing as all parties had notice, no party requested an adjournment or further evidence, and the judge had sufficient information to conclude that there were no solid grounds for revisiting the findings. The new evidence regarding Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome did not provide a real reason to doubt the original findings, and procedural fairness was not breached.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal is dismissed; the order refusing a rehearing and further expert evidence stands.