Re B (a child) (care proceedings: appellate judge’s power to remake decision) [2014] EWCA Civ 565, [2014] All ER (D) 88 (May)
On an appellate review, the judge’s first task was to identify the error of fact, value judgment or law sufficient to permit the appellate court to interfere. There was always a value judgment to be performed which was the comparative welfare analysis and the proportionality evaluation of the interference that the proposed order represented and accordingly there was a review to be undertaken about whether that judgment was right or wrong. Armed with the error identified, the judge then had a discretionary decision to make whether to re-make the decision complained of or remit the proceedings for a re-hearing. The judge had the power to fill gaps in the reasoning of the first court and give additional reasons in the same way that was permitted to an appeal court when a respondent’s notice had been filed. In the exercise of its discretion, the court had to keep firmly in mind the procedural protections provided by
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=961ae4db_1)
95ca96e3d47f4eff8d147c4f0df17c77.tmb-mov69x69.png?sfvrsn=3db5d86b_1)
