Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
             This is an application under Part II of the Children Act 1989, which I have heard over the course of two days. I am dealing with the welfare of ST, who was born in May 2019 (she is three years old) and LT, who was born in March 2018 (she is five years old).� The children's mother is EH ( "the mother" ).� She is the applicant in these proceedings.� The children's father is FT ( "the father" ).� He is the respondent in these proceedings.
             At the beginning of this hearing, I indicated to the parties that it appeared necessary and in the interests of justice for there to be participation arrangements given: 1) the allegations made by the mother against the father of domestic abuse; and 2) the father's traumatic brain injury.
             It appeared to me that each of these features rendered each of the parties potentially vulnerable witnesses in these proceedings.� In light of this, I directed there should be a screen separating the parties during the hearing and that there would be a screen during the giving of evidence.� I also prohibited each of the parties from cross-examining each other personally.�
             The father experienced a serious traumatic brain injury in 2008. It has impacted his level of functioning and his ability to participate in these proceedings.� I discussed with him at the outset ways in which I could assist him in participating in these proceedings.
             There are two issues:
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.