D v R
[2023] EWHC 406 (Fam)
K v W (fact-finding hearing: permission to appeal and adducing new evidence)
25 October 2023
[2023] EWFC 292 (B)
Family Court
A mom appealed a court decision about domestic abuse allegations against her ex-partner. The judge said her reasons for appealing weren't strong enough and she also couldn't add new evidence because she should have presented it earlier. The case will now proceed to decide what happens to the children.
Key Facts
- •Mother (K) appeals District Judge Veal's fact-finding judgment in a case involving allegations of domestic abuse between her and the father (W).
- •The case involves two children, born in 2010 and 2013.
- •The couple separated in 2017, with allegations of domestic abuse made by both parties.
- •A fact-finding hearing took place in May 2023, resulting in a lengthy judgment from the District Judge.
- •The mother appeals on ten grounds, including failures to comply with PD12J, inadequate consideration of the impact on children, and incorrect findings regarding specific allegations (strangulation, sexual abuse).
- •The mother also seeks to adduce new evidence – an audio recording of a threat made by the father.
Legal Principles
Permission to appeal requires a real prospect of success or other compelling reason.
FPR 2010, r30.3(7)
A substantive appeal can succeed if the lower court's decision was wrong or unjust due to procedural irregularity.
FPR 2010 r30.12
Adducing fresh evidence requires it to be unavailable despite reasonable diligence, potentially influential, and credible.
Ladd v Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489
PD12J guidelines on domestic abuse cases, including considerations for child arrangements orders.
Practice Direction 12J
Outcomes
Permission to appeal refused on all ten grounds.
The judge found that none of the grounds demonstrated a real prospect of success. Many issues were procedural oversights that should have been addressed with the District Judge, not through an appeal.
Application to adduce fresh evidence dismissed.
The mother failed to meet the threshold for fresh evidence under Ladd v Marshall; specifically, she failed to show the evidence could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence.