Re Z (Disclosure to Social Work England: Findings of Domestic Abuse)
[2023] EWHC 447 (Fam)
T (Children: Non-Disclosure), Re
18 March 2024
[2024] EWCA Civ 241
Court of Appeal
A dad was kept in the dark about serious concerns about his son's mental health. A lower court said it was to protect the son, but a higher court ruled the dad had a right to know, with conditions to keep the son safe. The higher court said it's important for everyone to have the same information to make good decisions for the child.
Key Facts
- •Private law family proceedings concerning two children (aged 12 and 8).
- •Parents separated in 2021, with court involvement.
- •Mother obtained a live-with order, reducing father's time with children.
- •Younger child (Tom) exhibited acute distress, leading mother to stop contact with father.
- •Mother made a without-notice application to withhold information from father about Tom's distress, including self-harm and suicidal thoughts.
- •Judge initially ordered non-disclosure, later affirmed on appeal, then overturned by Court of Appeal.
- •The Court of Appeal considered the balance between the father's Article 6 rights and the child's Article 8 rights.
Legal Principles
A party is entitled to disclosure of all materials that may be considered by the court when reaching a decision adverse to that party.
Re D (Minors) (Adoption Reports: Confidentiality) [1996] AC 593
The court must consider whether disclosure would involve a real possibility of significant harm to the child, weighing the child's interest in having material tested against the risk and gravity of harm.
Re D (Minors) (Adoption Reports: Confidentiality) [1996] AC 593
Non-disclosure should be the exception, not the rule.
Re D (Minors) (Adoption Reports: Confidentiality) [1996] AC 593
Principles of non-disclosure extend to risks of harm to others.
Re B (Disclosure to other Parties) [2001] 2 FLR 1017 and Re A (Sexual Abuse: Disclosure) [2012] UKSC 60
The court must balance the child's Article 8 rights with the parent's Article 6 rights.
This case
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal overturned the High Court's decision to withhold information from the father.
The High Court's approach was insufficiently thorough; it did not adequately consider the risks of non-disclosure or the potential safeguards. The Court of Appeal found that the risks could be managed and that continued non-disclosure was not in the child's best interests.
The Court of Appeal ordered disclosure of the withheld material to the father, subject to strict conditions to mitigate potential harm.
To ensure a fair trial for the father and to facilitate a meaningful psychological assessment of the family.