Re B (Minors) (Disclosure of Medical Reports)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 12 March 1993 |
| Date | 12 March 1993 |
| Court | Family Division |
Family Division
Before Mr Justice Douglas Brown
Children - disclosure of medical reports - legal and professional privilege
Since proceedings under the Children Act 1989 were adversarial, although they should be conducted in a non-adversarial spirit, there was no power, as there might be in wardship proceedings, to over-ride legal and professional privilege to order disclosure of a medical report on which a party did not intend to rely.
Mr Justice Douglas Brown so held in the Family Division when giving directions in interlocutory proceedings in preparation for care proceedings, under section 31 of the 1989 Act, concerning two children of the same mother but with different fathers.
Mr Paul Rippon for the mother; Miss Jane Probyn for the local authority; Miss Anne Bradwell for father A; Miss Lesley Carter for father B; Miss Cheryl Williams for the children and the guardian ad litem.
MR JUSTICE DOUGLAS BROWN said there was serious concern about the health and well being of the children and it was the record of the mother's care that was to be examined. The matter came before Mr Justice Hollis who ordered that medical reports were to be filed and served. The order was without apparent qualification, and therefore in mandatory terms, that each party serve the named doctors' reports by March 9. On March 9 an application was made, to his Lordship, to order disclosure by consent of records from six hospitals.
Mr Rippon, who did not appear before Mr Justice Hollis, asked in effect that the order be amended by the addition of words to the effect that the mother file and serve the reports of her doctors if she intended to rely on them.
Counsel for one of the fathers and the guardian ad litem opposed that. Mr Rippon submitted that the reports were governed by legal and professional privilege and the mother could not be forced to disclose them against her will.
It was not completely clear whether there had or had not been any waiver of privilege before Mr Justice Hollis but for the purposes of this decision it was assumed by his Lordship that there had been none.
Mr Rippon said that the law was clear that medical reports made on behalf of a party to litigation on the advice of a legal adviser were privileged documents and, in the absence of waiver, no order for disclosure could be made.
His Lordship was referred to Causton v Mann Egerton (Johnsons) LtdWLR ([1974] 1 WLR 162)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Oxfordshire County Council v M
...(Disclosure of Material)[1994] 1 FCR 225 approved. Decision of Douglas Brown, J in Re B (Minors) (Disclosure of Medical Reports)[1993] 2 FCR 241 disapproved. Statutory provisions referred to: Children Act 1989, ss 1 and 31. Family Law Reform Act 1969, s 7(2). Family Proceedings Rules 1991, ......
-
Re L (Minors) (Document: Non-Party Disclosure)
...Disclosure) [1990] FCR 581; sub nom Brown v Mathews [1990] Ch 662; [1990] 2 All ER 153. B (Minors) (Disclosure of Medical Reports), Re[1993] 2 FCR 241; sub nom Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council v O [1993] Fam 205; [1993] 3 WLR 493. Cuaston v Mann Egerton (Johnson Ltd) [1974] 1 WLR......
-
Re L (Minors) (Disclosure of Medical Report)
...Disclosure), Re [1991] FCR 844. Blunt v Park Lane Hotel Limited [1942] 2 KB 253. B (Minors) (Disclosure of Medical Reports), Re[1993] 2 FCR 241. Brown v Matthews [1990] FCR D (Minors) (Wardship: Disclosure), Re[1992] 1 FCR 297. F (Minors) (Wardship: Police Investigation), Re [1989] Fam 18. ......
-
Re R (Minor) (Legal Professional Privilege) (Disclosure of Material)
...1989. Cases referred to judgment:A (Minors) (Disclosure of Material), Re [1991] FCR 844. B (Minors) (Disclosure of Medical Reports), Re[1993] 2 FCR 241. E (SA), Re [1984] 1 WLR 156. Ian Karsten, QC and Peter Wain for the local authority. Patricia Scotland, QC, Kharin Cox and Henry Setright ......