Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

‘We are asked in this case to reconcile the irreconcilable’: Re A

Sep 29, 2018, 18:39 PM
Slug : McCarthy-FebFLJ2013
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jan 29, 2013, 01:30 AM
Article ID : 101473

Roger McCarthy QC

Coram Chambers:

This article describes the recent Supreme Court decision of Re A (Sexual Abuse: Disclosure) [2012] UKSC 60, [2013] 1 FLR (forthcoming) and includes a number of comments on the judgment. The Supreme Court upheld a Court of Appeal decision to order disclosure of confidential allegations which had been made by a vulnerable third party against a parent who was a party to a contact dispute. The case included a discussion of Arts 3, 6 and 8 of the European Convention and of the expectation that material relevant to children cases should be disclosed. The irreconcilable conflict was between the rights of the third party and the rights of the parties to the proceedings. The Court described the approach to be taken in assessing the Art 3 compliance of actions which followed on from court orders. The Court rejected the option of a closed material procedure. The Court described a step by step procedure which could be followed to provide procedural safeguards for witnesses. The article ends with the authors' explanation of the position of judges who have read material which is not to be disclosed to all the parties.

The full version of this article appears in the February 2013 issue of Family Law.

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