Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'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
JM v RM [2021] EWHC 315 (Fam)
(Family Division, Mostyn J, 22 February 2021)Abduction – Wrongful retention – Hague Convention application – Mother decided not to return to Australia with children – COVID 19...
Re A (A Child) (Hague Convention 1980: Set Aside) [2021] EWCA Civ 194
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), Moylan, Asplin LJJ, Hayden J, 23 February 2021)Abduction – Hague Convention 1980 – Return order made – Mother successfully applied to set aside due...
Disabled women more than twice as likely to experience domestic abuse
The latest data from the Office of National Statistics shows that, in the year ending March 2020, around 1 in 7 (14.3%) disabled people aged 16 to 59 years experienced any form of domestic abuse in...
The President of the Family Division endorses Public Law Working Group report
The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary has published a message from the President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, in which the President endorses the publication of the President’s...
HMCTS updates online divorce services guidance
HM Courts and Tribunals Service have recently updated the online divorce services guidance with the addition of guides for deemed and dispensed service applications, alternative service...
View all articles
Authors

CARE PROCEEDINGS: Re A and B (Withdrawal of Fact-Finding Hearing)

Sep 29, 2018, 18:55 PM
Slug : care-proceedings-re-a-and-b-withdrawal-of-fact-finding-hearing
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Dec 6, 2013, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 104229

(Sir Mark Hedley, sitting as a deputy High Court judge, 29 January 2013)

The youngest of three siblings died at 10 weeks with extensive injuries including all three features of the triad. During care proceedings one medical opinion was that these were non-accidental injuries while another was that the child's skull was of such an unusual nature that it was impossible to conclude how it would react to any level of force and, therefore, it was not possible to determine the mechanism of the injury let alone attribute parental culpability. In previous proceedings the mother was found responsible for three fractures sustained by the middle child who was then placed with the paternal grandmother while the oldest child returned home. The youngest child was born at around that time and the entire family was subject to close supervision and local authority scrutiny.

The local authority had now concluded that the interests of the children required the eventual reunification of the family and now sought permission to withdraw the fact-finding hearing.

The local authority was granted permission to withdraw the fact-finding hearing. In respect of bruising caused to the middle child, the injury matched the history and the requisite standard of proof that this was non-accidental would not be met. A fact-finding hearing of the issue of bruising would be disproportionate, unnecessary and unjustifiable.

In future management of the case the parents had to be treated on the basis that they bore no culpable responsibility for the death of the youngest child or bruising to the middle child. A welfare hearing could now take place. 

 

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