Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2016] All ER (D) 08 (Jun)
Neutral Citation: [2016] EWFC 29
Court: Family Court

Peter Jackson J

Judgment Dates: 16 May 2016


Practice - Family proceedings - Evidence - Covert recordings of child - Dispute concerning whether child should continue to live with father or move to live with mother - Meetings taking place between child and social worker, family support worker and children's guardian - Father and his partner determined to know what child was saying at meetings and also to record what professionals were saying - Father producing transcripts of conversations - Recordings being admitted - Court ruling child should move to live with mother - Court considering consequences of parent covertly recording child.

The Case

Practice Family proceedings. The Family Court described the serious consequences that had arisen for one family after a parent had covertly recorded a child in the course of a dispute about where the child should live. It held that it was almost always likely to be wrong for a recording device to be placed on a child for the purpose of gathering evidence in family proceedings, whether or not the child was aware of its presence, and that anyone who was considering doing something similar should, first, think carefully about the consequences.

Practice Areas

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