Key Facts
- •Care proceedings concerning three children (AB, CD, EF) with allegations of emotional harm and potential neglect.
- •Mother (NM) alleges collusion between a social worker (WR), and residential workers (TT, KS) to elicit negative evidence and delete records.
- •An email from the children's home appears to support the mother's allegations of collusion.
- •The court must decide whether to conduct a fact-finding hearing on the mother's allegations.
- •The final hearing is scheduled for 11 March 2024, and delaying it would negatively impact the children's welfare.
Legal Principles
The court's decision on whether to conduct a fact-finding hearing is a case management decision guided by the overriding objective of dealing with cases justly.
FPR 2010 r. 1.1
Factors to consider when deciding on a fact-finding hearing include the child's interests, time and cost, evidential result, necessity, relevance to care plans, impact on parties, prospects of a fair trial, and justice of the case.
Oxfordshire CC v DP, RS and BS [2005] 2 FLR 1031; Re H-D-H (Children) [2021] EWCA Civ 1192
The court can exclude evidence or refuse cross-examination.
FPR 2010 r.22.1(2), (3)
Delay in care proceedings prejudices the child's welfare; the court must aim for a timely resolution.
Children Act 1989 s.1(2), s.32
A parent must have a fair opportunity to present their case, including cross-examining key witnesses.
Re S-W (Children) [2015] EWCA Civ 27
Outcomes
The court declines to conduct a fact-finding hearing on the mother's allegations of collusion.
The court balances the factors in Oxfordshire and concludes that a fact-finding hearing is not necessary to achieve a just outcome, given the significant delay it would cause, harming the children's welfare. The evidence against WR is weak and insufficient to warrant a separate hearing.
Cross-examination on the email will not be permitted.
Permitting cross-examination would necessitate examining the same issues already deemed unnecessary to resolve the case justly. This would be contradictory to the court's decision against a fact-finding hearing.