Children

Contact proceedings - father's solicitors commissioning expert report without court's permission - solicitors to bear costs of expert's feesIn re A (Children) (Contact: Expert Evidence): FD (Wall J): 6 February 2001The father applied for contact with his children, who were wards of court.

The judge ordered interim supervised contact at a contact centre.

The father surreptitiously videotaped a session with his children at the centre and instructed his solicitors to commission a report from a clinical psychologist based upon it, for use in the contact proceedings.No permission had been sought from the court or notice given to the mother or her legal representatives, and the instructions to the psychologist included an anonymised history of the case.

Since the father had also launched a grossly intemperate attack on the contact centre and on the personal and professional integrity of its personnel, the centre was given permission to intervene on that issue.

Having done so it sought an order for costs against the father.

The case was heard in chambers but judgment on those issues was handed down in open court subject to an order that nothing be published which identified the children, the parties or their legal representatives.Held, ordering that the father pay the costs of the centre's representation, that, although there had been no identification of the parties or unauthorised disclosure of court papers and thus no breach of rules 4.18 and 4.23 of the Family Proceedings Rules 1991, in family proceedings it was for the court to decide what expert evidence should be obtained and it was wholly inappropriate for one side to instruct an expert witness without the knowledge of the court or the other side's advisers or to seek to avoid obtaining the court's permission by providing information anonymously; and that since the court's permission had not been obtained the father's solicitors would be liable for the expert's fees.