S (findings of fact), Re

In a fact-finding hearing, allegations are established on the balance of probabilities. A witness’s deliberate lies on one subject do not automatically make all other evidence untruthful. The court must consider whether there are particular reasons for the lies and assess the remaining evidence independently. Credibility must be evaluated by reference to consistency, detail, supporting evidence, contemporaneous records and the manner in which evidence is given. Where the evidence supports serious allegations despite the witness’s dishonesty on another matter, findings may properly be made on the allegations proved.

The father sought contact with his three children after the mother left the family home with them and applied for protective injunctions. The mother made serious allegations concerning honour-based family conduct, forced marriage, the removal of a child after birth, domestic violence and rape. The father and maternal grandparents denied the allegations and alleged that the mother had fabricated them to conceal her relationship with a convicted drug dealer.

The court conducted a six-day fact-finding hearing. The central issues were the reliability of the mother’s evidence, the effect of her admitted lies about her relationship with the drug dealer, and whether the individual allegations were proved on the balance of probabilities.

1. The court applied the civil standard of proof. The burden rested on the person seeking findings, and the disputed allegations had to be shown to be more likely than not to be true.
2. Applying the direction in R v Lucas, the judge recognised that a person may have particular reasons for lying and that lies about one matter do not necessarily make evidence about other matters untruthful.
3. The mother’s evidence about the central allegations was broadly consistent, detailed and spontaneous. The evidence of the father, grandparents and sisters was consistent but largely consisted of blanket denials. The judge assessed the evidence by considering consistency with earlier statements, corroboration, contemporaneous records, inherent probabilities and the manner in which each witness gave evidence.
4. The judge found that the mother had deliberately and persistently lied about her relationship with a convicted drug dealer. Those lies were deplorable, but her explanation that she feared for herself and the children was credible in the context of the family history. The lies did not undermine her other allegations.
5. The court found, among other matters, that the family had moved to Pakistan after the mother’s sister left home; that the grandparents participated in the imprisonment and beating of a cousin; that the mother became pregnant by another cousin and was firmly married to the father; that a child was born and removed at birth; that the father assaulted and raped the mother; and that he subjected her and the children to other domestic abuse.
6. No finding was made about the cousin’s death or what happened to the first child. The primary findings were to form the basis for a subsequent assessment of risk and orders concerning the children’s future. Further directions were to be considered after submissions from the parties.