Child Support Agency v Forrest [2010] All ER (D) 126 (May)
The defence of self-incrimination, or the protection of the incrimination of another (from facing the possibility of criminal prosecution), was not in principle capable of constituting the defence of reasonable excuse within s 14A(4) of the Child Support Act 1991.
That was the case as a matter of ordinary statutory construction, as a matter of authority and on considerations of policy. Parliament had not included into s 14A the s 15(7) defence; had it wished to do so it would have done. Independent of that it was clear from well-established authority that the defence of self-incrimination was not to be made available on a plea of reasonable excuse.
There was also a powerful public interest that the information sought to be provided pursuant to a request under s 14A was so provided: the Child Support Agency had to fulfil its duties, for example, in assessing child maintenance payments.
