London Borough of Haringey v A & Ors
[2023] EWFC 301 (B)
X (A child), Re
8 December 2023
[2023] EWFC 264 (B)
Family Court
A baby got hurt, and social services initially thought his parents might have caused it. But after lots of expert medical opinions and investigations, everyone agreed the baby likely just had some very unlucky accidents. So, the case against the parents was dropped and the baby was able to go home.
Key Facts
- •One-year-old X suffered bilateral subdural haematoma, bilateral retinal hemorrhages, and an extensive spinal subdural hemorrhage.
- •Injuries initially suspected to be inflicted, leading to child protection procedures and foster care placement.
- •Parents cooperated with investigations, maintaining X's injuries were accidental.
- •Five expert medical reports commissioned to assess the injuries.
- •Local authority initially sought care orders but later applied to withdraw the application.
- •All parties agreed to the withdrawal of the care orders.
Legal Principles
The court must determine probability on evidence, not speculation or assumption, including its assessment of inherent probability/improbability, taking each piece of evidence in the context of the whole, and where the expert evidence is important but the evidence of the carers is of the utmost importance, and where there is no hierarchy of possibilities to be taken sequentially as part of a process of elimination.
Re BR (Proof of Facts) [2015] EWFC 41, Peter Jackson at §4 to §9
Where there is a genuine dispute about the origin of a medical finding, due consideration must be given to the possibility that the (true) cause is not known, that the doctors have missed something and/or that there is a condition (or explanation) that has not yet been discovered.
Re BR (Proof of Facts) [2015] EWFC 41, Peter Jackson at §10
To proceed otherwise is to succumb to 'the prosecutor's fallacy' that the medical evidence alone proves the allegation.
R v Henderson, Butler, Oyediran [2010] EWCA Crim 1269, [2011] 1 FLR 547, Moses LJ at §1
Outcomes
Local authority's application to withdraw care orders granted.
Totality of evidence suggests X's injuries most likely resulted from a fall from a cardboard box, and parents are not culpable. The court accepted that threshold for care orders was not met.