Family Court Finds Local Authority Failed to Establish Sexual Abuse Allegations in Care Proceedings (23 July 2026)

The Family Court has ruled that a local authority failed to establish that a five-year-old girl had been sexually abused, bringing to an end a lengthy and highly sensitive fact-finding hearing in care proceedings concerning her and her younger sister.

Duncan Lewis represented the mother  in The London Borough of Merton v The Mother and Others [2026] EWFC 177 (B), successfully defending a fact-finding hearing in which the local authority sought findings that her daughter had been sexually abused, that a pool of perpetrators should be identified from among those in the child's household, and that the mother had failed to protect the child from that abuse.

The case concerned two sisters, aged five and three, and involved an extensive family network including the mother, the children's respective fathers, the maternal grandmother, an aunt and her partner, each of whom was drawn into the proceedings either as a respondent or an intervenor. The proceedings had their roots in earlier concerns about chronic neglect, including issues with hygiene, developmental delay and the condition of the family home, which led to both children being made subject to Child Protection Plans before care proceedings were eventually issued.

During the currency of those proceedings, professionals recorded a substantial number of incidents in which the eldest child was reported to have displayed sexualised behaviours, both at school and during contact with professionals. These reports formed the centrepiece of the local authority's case and led to the instruction of an expert consultant counselling psychologist, whose evidence concluded that such behaviours were unlikely to be seen in a child who had not been exposed to sexual abuse.

HHJ Willans considered the evidence over a three-day hearing, hearing from the expert and each of the lay parties. In a detailed judgment, the court accepted that the child had displayed the behaviours alleged, but declined to find that those behaviours were the result of sexual abuse. Central to that conclusion was the court's assessment of the expert evidence, which it found to be undermined on several bases: the research relied upon did not, on proper analysis, support the expert's conclusions and in places appeared to contradict them; the expert lacked the specific clinical expertise required to distinguish behaviours caused by abuse from those attributable to developmental delay or other non-abusive explanations; and the expert had allowed the characterisation of the behaviours as "sexualised" by other professionals to influence her own assessment, raising a risk of circularity.

The judge was also critical of the routine use of the word "sexualised" to describe the child's behaviour ahead of any factual determination, drawing a parallel with the well-established caution against the use of the word "disclosure" in place of "allegation," on the basis that such language risks prejudging the very issue the court is required to determine.

Having found that the primary allegation of sexual abuse was not established, the associated allegations concerning identification of a pool of perpetrators and failure to protect necessarily fell away. The court noted that although the mother and grandmother had not been fully open about behaviours reported to have occurred within the home, this did not, on the balance of probabilities, point towards concealment of abuse, and was equally consistent with an innocent wish to distance themselves from an allegation of the utmost seriousness.

Duncan Lewis represented the mother from the pre-proceedings stage through to the conclusion of the fact-finding hearing, advising throughout the psychological and parenting assessments, drafting detailed response statements, and supporting counsel at both the fact-finding and judgment hearings.

The team at Duncan Lewis Solicitors were Gursharan Seera. 

Counsel instructed was Trisan Hyatt.

Read the full details of this case on Bailii’s website here.

About Gursharan Seera

Gursharan Seera is a Solicitor in the Family and Child Care department at Duncan Lewis, based in the firm's Shepherd's Bush office. Gursharan has significant experience representing parents in care proceedings involving allegations of sexual abuse, physical neglect and emotional harm, as well as supporting vulnerable clients through Child Protection Conferences and PLO Outlines, and this case reflects her continued commitment to defending parents against the most serious allegations brought within care proceedings.

About Duncan Lewis

Duncan Lewis is an award-winning, multi-service law firm ranked in the top tier by both Chambers & Partners and the Legal 500. The firm was named Women and Diversity in Law Firm of the Year 2026, reflecting its ongoing commitment to inclusivity, diversity and supporting vulnerable and marginalised clients across its practice areas.

Find full details of this case on Bailii’s website here.