The Court of Appeal has dismissed a father’s objection to having a female social worker as an independent expert to assess issues relating to a child arrangements order for his son.

The father and his estranged wife were raised as members of the Hassidic Haredi Orthodox Jewish community; the father in the US, the mother in the UK.

They married in 2013 and their child was born in 2014. They lived in Israel but separated in 2016. The mother had permanent custody of the child; the father had direct contact.

In 2018 the mother and child returned to the UK. Contact with the father continued.

The child attended an ultra-orthodox Jewish school. The mother moved address. She also moved the child to a different ultra-orthodox school without the father’s consent.

The father considered the changes to be non-compliant with the separation agreement. He applied for child arrangements and prohibited steps orders.

A CAFCASS Family Court adviser recommended an assessment by way of a report addressing issues of risk and recommendations for arrangements for the child’s welfare.

The father proposed that the assessment should be carried out by a particular male social worker. The mother proposed two female candidates.

The judge identified the relevant criteria as qualifications, costs and timeliness and appointed one of the female experts.

The father contended that the court had failed to attach adequate weight to his right to a fair hearing and to his religious and cultural beliefs.

The Court of Appeal upheld the judge’s decision.

Lord Justice Baker said the law did not “rule out the possibility” that a court might order an expert be a particular gender.

He added: “It is, however, imperative that any application that the expert instructed be of one specified gender must be clearly explained and fully supported by evidence demonstrating why such a stipulation should be included.”

He said the father had failed to set out his argument clearly and to support it with evidence. Until a relatively late stage in the proceedings, there had been little sign that he might object to the appointment of a female independent social worker.

He had been represented by a female solicitor throughout the proceedings and his first barrister was female. The CAFCASS Family Court adviser who carried out the initial safeguarding assessment was a woman.

The judge had correctly identified factors relevant to the decision and his assessment of those factors could not realistically be challenged.

Case citations: N (A Child) (Instruction of Expert), Re Court of Appeal (Civil Division) [2022] EWCA Civ 1588 Judge King LJ Baker LJ Dingemans LJ

If you would like more information or advice about the issues raised in this article, or any aspect of family law please contact our expert legal team on 02080040065, by email at [email protected] or using the form below.

The contents of this article are general information only. The information in this article is not legal or professional advice. The law may have changed since this article was published. Readers should not act on the basis of the information included and should obtain independent expert advice from qualified solicitors such as those within our firm.