J (A Child: Disclosure), Re (Rev 1)

J (A Child: Disclosure), Re (Rev 1)

The Court of Appeal held that the judge erred in conflating the issues of disclosure and compelling X to give evidence, and in failing to recognise the freestanding value of disclosure. The balance of ECHR rights, the centrality of the undisclosed material to the contact issue, and the necessity for fairness in the...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Z County Council; Respondent: Ms G (Mother); Respondent: Mr J (Father); Appellant: Children’s Guardian; Intervenor: X (the intervenor)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal Family Law (disclosure/contact) / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Confidential Information, Contact Orders, Public Interest Immunity, Children’s Welfare, Article 3 ECHR, Article 6 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR
Family Law Human Rights Disclosure of Confidential Information Contact Orders Public Interest Immunity Children’s Welfare Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR +1 more

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Z County Council

Applicant

Ms G (Mother)

Respondent

Mr J (Father)

Respondent

Children’s Guardian

Appellant

X (the intervenor)

Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Appeal Family Law (disclosure/contact) / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the identity and allegations of X should be disclosed to the parties in the context of child contact proceedings.
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in conflating the issue of disclosure with the issue of compelling X to give evidence.
  3. 3 How to balance the ECHR rights of the child, parents, and third party complainant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the judge erred in conflating the issues of disclosure and compelling X to give evidence, and in failing to recognise the freestanding value of disclosure. The balance of ECHR rights, the centrality of the undisclosed material to the contact issue, and the necessity for fairness in the proceedings required disclosure of X’s identity and allegations to the mother, father, and children’s guardian. Non-disclosure would render a fair trial impossible and would not be justified given the degree of disclosure already made and the interests at stake.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Disclosure of X’s identity and the substance of her allegations to the mother, father, and A’s children’s guardian.