R v A Local Authority & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1451 (06 December 2011)

R v A Local Authority & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 1451 (06 December 2011)

The DJMC and judge exercised their discretion appropriately in refusing a second expert report; the process was fair, the expert was suitable, and the refusal did not compromise the fairness of the proceedings or the child's welfare. No error of law or breach of ECHR rights occurred.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 1451
Parties
Appellant: R; First Respondent: A Local Authority; Second Respondent: B; Third Respondent: A B C (by the Children's Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Appeal (family Law Children) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Principal Registry of the Family Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Supervision Orders, Contact Orders, Judicial Discretion, Children Act 1989, Appeals Procedure
Family Law Child Protection Expert Evidence Supervision Orders Contact Orders Judicial Discretion Children Act 1989 Appeals Procedure

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Appellant

A Local Authority

First Respondent

B

Second Respondent

A B C (by the Children's Guardian)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (family Law Children) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Principal Registry of the Family Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to permit a second expert report constituted an error of law or unfairness
  2. 2 Whether the judicial discretion regarding expert evidence was properly exercised
  3. 3 Whether the father's right to a fair trial was compromised by the refusal

Ratio Decidendi

The DJMC and judge exercised their discretion appropriately in refusing a second expert report; the process was fair, the expert was suitable, and the refusal did not compromise the fairness of the proceedings or the child's welfare. No error of law or breach of ECHR rights occurred.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order for a second expert report
  • Supervision order and supervised contact arrangements upheld