North Northamptonshire Council v A Mother & Ors
[2024] EWFC 197
Re T & Anor
13 July 2023
[2023] EWFC 143 (B)
Family Court
A baby got hurt badly, and his older brother was found to be responsible. The judge also thought the mom wasn't completely honest, so the local authority gets to help look after the baby to make sure he's safe.
Key Facts
- •Baby R (DOB 2022) suffered a fractured skull, brain bleed, and significant facial injuries.
- •The mother's older son, N (DOB 2004), was present when the injuries occurred.
- •The mother's explanation of events was inconsistent with the medical evidence.
- •Medical experts concluded the injuries were inflicted, likely involving two separate incidents.
- •The mother's previous social services involvement involved concerns about N's behavior towards a sibling.
- •N claimed a dizzy spell caused him to drop R, but evidence suggested this was not the case.
Legal Principles
Standard of proof in care proceedings is the balance of probabilities.
Re B (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) [2008] UKHL 3 [2009] AC 11
Findings of fact must be based on evidence, not speculation.
Re A (A Child) (Fact-finding hearing: Speculation) [2011] EWCA Civ 12
The court considers the wider context of the evidence.
Re U (Serious Injury: Standard of Proof); Re B [2004] 2 FLR 263
Judges consider inherent probabilities, contemporaneous documentation, circumstantial evidence, and witness impressions.
Re B (Threshold Criteria: Fabricated Illness) [2002] EWHC 20 (Fam), [2004] 2 FLR 200
Evidence must be evaluated holistically, considering the relationship between different pieces of evidence.
Re T [2004] EWCA Civ 558
Parents are not required to prove their innocence; the local authority must prove the allegations.
Re M (A Child) [2012] EWCA Civ 1580
A witness's lie can strengthen evidence against them only if it's deliberate, relates to a material issue, and has no innocent explanation.
R v Lucas [1981] QB 720
In cases with multiple possible perpetrators, the court must determine if there's sufficient evidence to identify one on the balance of probabilities; if not, consider if there's a real possibility each individual inflicted the injury.
Re A (children) (Pool of perpetrators) [2022] EWCA Civ 1348 and Re B (a child) [2018] EWCA Civ 2127
Expert evidence advises, but the judge decides based on all evidence.
Re B (Care: Expert Witnesses) [1996] 1 FLR 667
Welfare of the child is paramount in care proceedings.
Children Act 1989, s.1(3)
Outcomes
Supervision order for T; Care order for R.
The court found N inflicted R's injuries and the mother was untruthful about her knowledge. A care order was deemed necessary for R to ensure his safety and enable local authority oversight, while a supervision order for T was considered sufficient given her age and the mother's capacity to care for her.