H & A (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 383 (21st March, 2002)

H & A (Children), Re [2002] EWCA Civ 383 (21st March, 2002)

The trial judge erred in his assessment of the likelihood of paternity, the secrecy of the issue, and the risk of family breakdown. The balancing exercise required by section 21(3)(b) Family Law Act 1969 was not properly conducted. The interests of justice and the children are best served by ascertaining the truth...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 383
Parties
Appellant: Mr B; Respondent: Mrs R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Caernarfon County Court Decision Refusing Application for Blood Tests Under Section 21 Family Law Act 1969
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders below set aside; application remitted for re-trial.
Legal Topics
Paternity, DNA Testing, Best Interests of the Child, Presumption of Legitimacy
Family Law Child Law Paternity DNA Testing Best Interests of the Child Presumption of Legitimacy

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr B

Appellant

Mrs R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Caernarfon County Court Decision Refusing Application for Blood Tests Under Section 21 Family Law Act 1969

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it is in the best interests of the children to order DNA testing to determine paternity under section 21(3)(b) Family Law Act 1969
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge correctly balanced the interests of certainty and family stability

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in his assessment of the likelihood of paternity, the secrecy of the issue, and the risk of family breakdown. The balancing exercise required by section 21(3)(b) Family Law Act 1969 was not properly conducted. The interests of justice and the children are best served by ascertaining the truth through scientific evidence. The appeal is allowed and the application remitted for re-trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders below set aside; application remitted for re-trial.

Orders

  • Applications to be transferred to the High Court for hearing by a judge of the Family Division.
  • Applications to be listed for directions as a matter of priority.