Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

BM v A Local Authority & Ors

[2024] EWFC 196
A dad wanted to change the court's decision about his daughter's death, after his wife admitted guilt. The judge said that even if the wife was solely responsible for the injuries, this new information wasn't enough to justify reopening the case. Because changing the decision would create a huge delay and upset the child's life, the judge said no.

Key Facts

  • Father applies to re-open findings of fact in a case involving the death of his daughter (A) in May 2020.
  • Previous findings indicated A suffered multiple injuries, possibly inflicted by both parents.
  • Mother subsequently pleaded guilty to manslaughter, admitting to causing A's injuries.
  • Father was acquitted in criminal proceedings.
  • Application seeks to revoke placement order for A's sibling (F) and rehabilitate F to father's care.
  • New evidence includes revised translations of messages and the mother's admission of guilt.

Legal Principles

Test for reopening findings of fact involves balancing finality of litigation with sound welfare decisions, considering resource use, delay's effect on the child, establishing truth, significance of findings, and the quality/relevance of further evidence. There must be solid grounds for believing that the earlier findings require revisiting.

Re E (Children : Reopening Findings of Fact) [2019] EWCA Civ 1447 and Re J (Children : Reopening Findings of Fact) [2023] EWCA Civ 465

Challenging a finding of fact depends on it having potential legal consequences; it's not permissible simply because a party dislikes it.

Re E (Children : Reopening Findings of Fact) [2019] EWCA Civ 1447

Outcomes

Application to re-open findings of fact refused.

While the mother's manslaughter plea might lead to different findings regarding the perpetrator of A's fatal injuries, it doesn't absolve the father of his role, particularly his knowledge, complicity, and failure to seek medical attention. The new evidence, primarily revised translations of messages, is insufficient to undermine the original findings. Reopening the case would cause unacceptable delays for F and potentially disrupt her stable placement, outweighing any potential benefits.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.