A child had been injured, and the local authority sought a care order. An expert witness for the parents had argued that the child may have suffered a condition of Temporary Brittle Bone Disease (TBBD).
Held: Though the parents had been convicted before a criminal court, there had been no finding of fact relevant to the current application. The expert evidence was quite unsatisfactory. TBBD is not recognised as a condition, and the expert’s evidence was so tendentious as to call into question the validity of his claim to be an expert witness. The burden of proof of abuse lay upon the local authority but on the balance of probability. Though the injury could be safely ascribed to neither parent the threshold criteria had been reached and directions were given for further hearings.
 EWHC Fam 1,  2 FLR 90,  EWHC Fam 6,  Fam Law 497
England and Wales
Cited – Re AB (Child Abuse: Expert Witnesses) FD 1995
Cited – Re R (A Minor) (Expert’s Evidence) FD 1991
The court gave guidance on the principles to be followed by experts providing evidence in children cases. . .
Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.163054