Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Hundreds of thousands of companies worldwide fall victims to hackers every year. Is your firm one of them?
SPONSORED CONTENT Image source: Information is beautifulYou and other lawyers and legal assistants in your firm likely have accounts on the hacked websites listed in the image above. If a hacker...
New complaints handling guide offers advice to local authorities
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today issuing new guidance on effective complaint handling for local authorities.Based on previous documents, the new guide offers practical,...
EU laws continue until at least 2038 and beyond
The UK left the EU on 31 January 2020.  But in matters of law it fully leaves on 31 December 2020.  But EU laws will continue to apply, and be applied, in the English family courts from 1...
Family Law Awards winners announced in virtual awards ceremony
The winners of the Family Law Awards 2020 were announced at 4pm during a much-anticipated virtual awards ceremony. Over the past ten years, the Family Law Awards has recognised the leading players in...
Behaviour-based divorces still merit close consideration
Some recent cases illustrate the evidential and procedural issues involved in dealing with proofs on the merits of divorce, which are worth considering even though most cases may conclude on a...
View all articles
Authors

PATERNITY:L v P (Paternity Test: Child's Objection) [2011] EWHC 3399 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 18:21 PM
Slug : 2011ewhc3399fam
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Aug 8, 2012, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 99681

(Family Division, Hedley J, 28 July 2011) 

The issue arose whether the 15-year-old should be compelled to provide DNA to discover whether the man named on her birth certificate was in fact her father. The putative father had not had much contact during her life but the mother issued an application for child maintenance, arrears of which had accrued of £20,000.

The father applied for a declaration under s 55(a) of the Family Law Act 1996 that he was not the father. The mother had no objection to a DNA test but would not provide consent given the girl's strong objections.

The balance fell firmly in upholding the girl's refusal. Her objection was reasonable, the father had reaffirmed his position as her father throughout her life. There was only the thinnest of evidence that he may not be her father. Refusing to order DNA test.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from