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
Help separated parents ditch avoidance strategies that stop them resolving differences
The desire to avoid conflict with an ex is the primary reason that separated parents do not get to see their children.  That’s an eye-opening finding from a survey of 1,105 separated...
What is a Cohabitation Agreement, and do I need one?
Many couples, despite living together, never seek to legally formalise their living and financial arrangements.  They mistakenly believe that the concept of a ‘common law’ husband and...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
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...
View all articles
Authors

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