The father appealed against a finding that he had been the sole perpetrator of injuries to his children. There had been the first limb of a split hearing.
Held: The judge had made an unnecessary finding. It was clear that at least one of the two carers was responsible, but not clear which one, and the court was not required always to identify one responsible individual. Wall LJ said that judges should not strain to identify the perpetrator as a result of the decision in Re B: ‘If an individual perpetrator can be properly identified on the balance of probabilities, then . . it is the judge’s duty to identify him or her. But the judge should not start from the premise that it will only be in an exceptional case that it will not be possible to make such an identification.’
Judges:
Thorpe, Wall, Elias LJJ
Citations:
[2009] EWCA Civ 472, Times 25-Aug-2009, [2009] 2 FCR 555, [2009] 2 FLR 668
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – In re L (A Child: Media Reporting) FD 18-Apr-2011
The local authority had intervened on suspecting physical abuse. L was placed with the maternal grandmother who took L to Ireland before care proceedings were commenced. The Irish court found him to have been wrongfully removed, and orders were made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346801
