In re V v [2012] 2 JLR 38 (22 May 2012)

In re V v [2012] 2 JLR 38 (22 May 2012)

The court held that there is no general rule requiring a stay of care proceedings pending criminal proceedings, and that the welfare of the child is paramount. Where finality in care proceedings is overwhelmingly in the children's interests and there is no danger of prejudice to any future criminal trial, the fact-finding hearing should not be adjourned.

Citation
[2012] 2 JLR 38
Parties
Father: V; Children: Children (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
22 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Public Law Care Proceedings / Application for Adjournment Pending Criminal Investigation
Outcome
Application for adjournment refused
Legal Topics
Parallel Care and Criminal Proceedings, Adjournment, Welfare of the Child, Fact Finding Hearing

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

V

Father

Children (unnamed)

Children

Procedural Posture

Public Law Care Proceedings / Application for Adjournment Pending Criminal Investigation

  1. 1 Whether public law care proceedings should be stayed pending determination of parallel criminal proceedings
  2. 2 Whether a fact-finding hearing concerning alleged abuse should be adjourned due to ongoing criminal investigation

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there is no general rule requiring a stay of care proceedings pending criminal proceedings, and that the welfare of the child is paramount. Where finality in care proceedings is overwhelmingly in the children's interests and there is no danger of prejudice to any future criminal trial, the fact-finding hearing should not be adjourned.

Court Disposition

Application for adjournment refused

Orders

  • Fact-finding hearing to proceed without adjournment