header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
27 September 2013
Issue: 7577 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Paternity—DNA testing—Jurisdiction

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Re M (a child) (Paternity: DNA testing) [2013] EWCA Civ 1131; [2013] All ER (D) 148 (Sep)

Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Longmore, Underhill and Macur LJJ, 17 Sep 2013

DNA testing to establish paternity should not be ordered unless it is necessary for it to be done before a conclusion can be reached. It is best carried out in a welfare context and by the court of the child’s habitual residence.

Mark Jarman for the father. Robin Powell for the mother.

The proceedings concerned a child, L, born in 2008. The parents were Latvian nationals. Following their separation, the father had regular contact with L, and L resided with the father for a period while the mother worked abroad. In 2012, difficulties arose about the father continuing to have contact with L, resulting in the father issuing proceedings in Latvia. An agreement reached between the parents was recorded in an order of the Latvian court, which recorded that the father’s claim had been pursued to establish a procedure for exercising rights “with the daughter”.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll