Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
Spotlight
A day in the life Of...
Ally Tow
Ally Tow
Senior Associate
Read on
CRIMINAL LAW: R v L [2006] EWCA Crim 1902
Date:27 JUL 2006

(Court of Appeal; Sir Igor Judge P, Sir Mark Potter P, Mr Justice Crane; 27 July 2006) [2006] 2 FLR (forthcoming)

In the care proceedings the judge took the view that he was unable to say, on the evidence, whether one parent was more likely to have inflicted the injuries on the child than the other. Only the father was prosecuted for the death of and injuries to the child. The father argued that in view of the care judgment and finding the Crown was wrong to assume that the mother had not caused or played some part in the death and injuries. He also argued that it was contrary to public policy for a competent court to make a finding which was factually contrary to the finding of another competent court on the same facts. The judge in the criminal proceedings rejected those submissions and the jury were not made aware of the care findings. The evidence available was for all effective purposes the same in both proceedings.

The two sets of proceedings, care and criminal, were different in a number of respects. The decision in the care proceedings was not, and could not be, a final determination of the criminal proceedings. The appeal was dismissed.