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...
Latest articles
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
Northamptonshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust v AB
The issue in this case concerned AB’s capacity to make specific decisions about treatment relating to her anorexia nervosa. She was 28 years old and had suffered with anorexia since the age of...
Focusing on behaviour and attitudes of separating parents
I am sure that if this year's Family Law Awards were an in-person event as usual, rather than this year’s virtual occasion, much of the chatter among family law professionals would be...
View all articles

Re R (Allegations of Abuse: Fair Trial [2012] EWCA Civ 1783

Sep 29, 2018, 18:40 PM
Slug : re-r-allegations-of-abuse-fair-trial-2012-ewca-civ-1783
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Feb 1, 2013, 02:30 AM
Article ID : 101521

(Court of Appeal, Thorpe, Patten, Richards LJJ, 27 November 2012)

A fact-finding hearing took place to determine whether allegations made by the 8 year old child of sexual abuse by the father were true. The mother had been admitted to a mental health unit and did not give evidence.

The judge found that as the father had not been able to cross-examine the child or the mother he had been placed at an unfair advantage and had not experienced a fair trial. He, therefore deleted the allegations insofar as they related to the father. The local authority responded by informing the judge that the mother would now wish to give oral evidence but the judge refused her permission asserting that it would not be fair to reopen the discussion once a decision had been made. The children's guardian appealed.

The appeal was allowed. The judge's initial ruling had been a bizarre act of reasoning and a bizarre conclusion. The judge had reached the wrong conclusion in the heat of the moment and should have concluded that once the mother had expressed a wish to give evidence he ought to allow more time for the mother to participate.



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