An allegation had been made by a daughter of sexual abuse against her step-father. Despite his acquittal, the local authority went ahead with an application for a care order. The authority now appealed against a finding that it had not established a risk to the children to a sufficient standard.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge had used a two stage approach. That was approved.
Millett LJ said: ‘If the likelihood of the child suffering harm in the future depends upon the truth of disputed allegations, the court must investigate the allegations and determine, on the balance of probabilities, whether they are true or false. It is not sufficient that there is a real possibility that the allegations may be true if the probability is that they are not.’ As to the differing circumstances covered by the sub-section: ‘In the first it is plain that the court must be satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that the child is suffering significant harm. It is not enough for the court to conclude that there is a real possibility that the child may be suffering significant harm. The same test must be applied to the second factual situation.’
Kennedy LJ dissented.
Judges:
Sir Stephen Brown P, Millett LJ, Kennedy LJ
Citations:
[1995] 1 FLR 641
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Newham London Borough Council v Attorney-General CA 1993
The court rejected an argument that ‘likely to suffer significant harm’ in the subsection was to be equated with ‘on the balance of probabilities’. . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children
Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.416037