Re S (A Child: Findings of Fact)
[2023] EWCA Civ 346
K-K (Children), Re
10 September 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 1025
Court of Appeal
A stepfather was found guilty of sexually abusing his stepdaughter, and the mother was found guilty of failing to protect her. The parents appealed, arguing the judge didn't fairly assess the evidence, especially the girl's later retractions of her claims. The appeals court disagreed, saying the judge considered everything properly and that her decision was reasonable.
Key Facts
- •NK and KK are the mother and stepfather of child A, involved in care proceedings.
- •A made repeated allegations of sexual abuse against KK between 2017 and 2022, later retracting them.
- •The judge found KK perpetrated sexual abuse against A, and NK failed to protect her.
- •KK appealed the findings against him, and NK made a late application to appeal.
- •A's allegations were initially made to NK, then reported to school officials and police.
- •A's ABE interview resulted in a retraction, and subsequent investigations were closed.
- •Allegations resurfaced in November 2022, leading to renewed investigations and care proceedings.
- •The judge found inconsistencies in NK and KK's accounts, impacting credibility assessments.
- •The judge considered the context of A's retractions, including pressure from NK's actions.
Legal Principles
Appeal courts should not interfere with trial judge's conclusions on primary facts unless plainly wrong. The test is whether no reasonable judge could have reached that decision.
Fage UK Ltd & Anor v Chobani UK Ltd & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ; Volpi & Anor v Volpi [2022] EWCA Civ 464
The burden of proof remains on the applicant throughout, but the judge can consider all evidence, including the credibility of those who testify.
In the Matter of K-K (Children) [2024] EWCA Civ 1025
Failure to follow ABE guidance does not automatically preclude findings of abuse if the evidence as a whole justifies it.
Re S (A Child) (Findings of Fact) [2023] EWCA Civ 346
Outcomes
KK's appeal dismissed.
The judge's findings were not unreasonable or irrational; she considered all evidence and inconsistencies, and her assessment of witness credibility was justified.
NK's permission to appeal refused.
Her grounds of appeal were unsustainable, as the judge's conclusions regarding pressure on A to retract were supported by evidence and logical inferences.