Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2015] All ER (D) 64 (May)
Neutral Citation: [2015] EWCA Civ 442
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Judge:

Lord Justice Longmore, Lord Justice Ryder and Lord Justice Briggs

Representation Mr Feehan QC and Ms Purdy for the mother.
  Mr Morgan for the authority.
  Ms Morgan QC for the father.
  Mr Cohen QC and Ms Bartlett for the paternal grandmother.
Judgment Dates: 7 May 2015

Catchwords

Family proceedings - Care proceedings - Appeal against findings of fact - In course of care proceedings relating to four children, findings of fact being made concerning one child, Z - Z being discovered with anti-psychotic prescription drug Olanzapine in his body - Court's examination focussing on who having contact with Z and opportunity to administer drug - Expert toxicologist being instructed and giving evidence as to, inter alia, half-life of drug - Judge finding Z's mother being sole perpetrator - Whether judge wrongly attributing set time for excretion of drug from Z's body and wrongly conducting calculation for time of likely dose purporting to identify mother as sole perpetrator of its administration.

The Case

Family proceedings Care proceedings. In the course of care proceedings concerning four children, findings of fact were made in relation to one of the children, Z. He had been discovered to have had the drug Olanzapine in his body. The judge found that the mother was sole perpetrator. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, in dismissing the mother's appeal, held that the judge's conclusion about the administration of the Olanzapine discovered in Z's system by a test taken on 14 August 2013 had been neither his own speculation nor an unwarranted calculation or deduction of his own. It had been a proper inference drawn from the available factual evidence and the un-contradicted scientific opinion evidence. His conclusion was, accordingly, unassailable.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.