A Local Authority v SB & Ors
[2023] EWFC 58 (B)
Re C & A (Children: Acquisition and Discharge of Parental Responsibility by an Unmarried Father)
9 March 2023
[2023] EWHC 516 (Fam)
High Court
A man's name was on a child's birth certificate, giving him parental rights. A DNA test proved he wasn't the biological father. The judge decided that the man automatically loses his parental rights because he was never the real father to begin with, so no extra checks were needed.
Key Facts
- •Local authority applies for public law orders for two children, C (12) and A (6), with different fathers.
- •Mother applies for a declaration of non-parentage for C's father, N (named on birth certificate but not biological father).
- •Paternity test confirms N is not C's biological father.
- •Mother, local authority, and guardian support immediate declaration of non-parentage and discharge of N's parental responsibility.
- •N accepts he is not the biological father but argues for adjournment and welfare analysis before discharge of parental responsibility.
Legal Principles
Parental responsibility acquisition and discharge for unmarried fathers.
Children Act 1989 (CA 1989)
Registration of father's name on birth certificate.
Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 (BDRA 1953)
Presumption of paternity for registered fathers; rebuttable by evidence of non-biological link.
Case law (RQ v PA, Re G, A Local Authority v SB & Ors)
Paramountcy of child's welfare in parental responsibility decisions.
Children Act 1989
Outcomes
Mother's application granted.
The court found that the presumption of paternity, underpinning N's acquisition of parental responsibility via birth certificate registration, was rebutted by the DNA evidence. A welfare analysis was deemed unnecessary as the basis for the parental responsibility was removed. Section 4(2A) of the Children Act 1989, requiring a court order to discharge parental responsibility, was satisfied by this judgment.
N's parental responsibility for C discharged.
Based on the declaration of non-parentage, N's parental responsibility is terminated from the date of judgment.
N's application for adjournment denied.
The adjournment was deemed unnecessary given that the judge concluded that no welfare analysis was necessary under the presented circumstances.