header-logo header-logo

A matter of fact(s): fact-finding hearings in private children proceedings

22 July 2020 / Kim Beatson , Victoria Rylatt
Issue: 7896 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail
24635
Fact-finding hearings in private children proceedings: an overview, by Kim Beatson & Victoria Brown
  • A fact-finding hearing: a court makes findings of fact on issues identified by the parties or the court.
  • Domestic abuse and definitions: encompassing, but not limited to, psychological, physical, sexual, financial, or emotional abuse.
  • The burden of proof: on the party making the allegation.
  • Evidence and practical issues: statutory guidance.
  • Following a FFH: the best interests of a child.
  • Appealing findings of fact: notoriously difficult.

A ‘fact-finding hearing’ (FFH) is the first limb of a split hearing which is a hearing divided in to two parts. In the first half the court makes findings of fact on issues identified by the parties or the court and recorded in a Scott Schedule (precedents available from us if needed). During the second part the court decides the case based on the findings.

Often there will be a clear and stark issue such as sexual or serious physical

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll