Re S (A Child: Findings of Fact)
[2023] EWCA Civ 346
Re T & Ors (Children) (Adequacy of Reasons)
29 June 2023
[2023] EWCA Civ 757
Court of Appeal
A judge made important decisions about a family without explaining his reasons clearly enough. A higher court said the judge's work was not good enough and sent the case back to be looked at again to see if a new trial is needed.
Key Facts
- •Appeal by a 19-year-old man (S) and his mother against findings of fact in care proceedings concerning S's younger siblings.
- •Allegations of sexual abuse by S against his sister T (aged 11-12), and the mother's alleged failure to protect T.
- •T's inconsistent statements, retracting and repeating allegations.
- •Allegations of physical violence between T and her mother.
- •Lengthy proceedings with multiple adjournments and significant evidential complexities.
- •Oral judgment delivered after a 12-day hearing due to time constraints.
- •The judge found the sexual abuse allegations proven.
- •The appeal focuses on the adequacy of the judge's reasoning and procedural irregularities.
Legal Principles
Adequacy of reasons in family court judgments.
Re B (A Child) (Adequacy of Reasons) [2022] EWCA Civ 407
Standard of proof in family court proceedings (balance of probabilities).
Various case law cited in the judgment (not explicitly named).
Considering the credibility and reliability of witnesses, particularly children.
Various case law cited in the judgment (not explicitly named), including ABE principles.
Assessing the impact of lies and retractions in child abuse allegations.
Lucas direction (from a 1981 Queen's Bench case) and Re M [2013].
Outcomes
Appeal allowed on grounds 1 and 5 (inadequate reasoning and procedural irregularity).
The judge's oral judgment was insufficiently detailed, omitting crucial evidence analysis and lacking explanation of findings. The delivery of a short overview judgment instead of a written judgment after such a lengthy and complex hearing was deemed procedurally irregular.
Judgment and findings set aside.
Due to the inadequacy of the reasoning and procedural irregularity, the original judgment was deemed invalid.
Proceedings remitted to the Designated Family Judge.
To determine whether a full rehearing is necessary, considering the children's best interests and other relevant factors.