Judgment has just been published in a most unusual court application. A father sought contact with twin boys who his ex-wife denied had ever been born.  To obtain an order giving him access to the children, the potential father had first to prove their existence to the court, in the face of the mother's continued denials. The mother claimed the application was a manifestation of the the ex-husband's controlling and coercive behaviour towards her. 

Family courts cannot act as investigators, and are reliant upon the evidence the parties put before them.  In this complex case, the parties had no legal representation and the court had to work hard to sift through the incredible (and extensive) evidence presented from friends, family, GPs and hospitals. Ultimately the judge thought, but could not positively conclude, that the evidence suggested one child, not two, may have been born. 

No doubt further hearings will be needed to try to establish the unvarnished truth but this case illustrates a number of things:

• the challenge faced by courts when facing untrained and emotionally invested litigants in person, and the impact of such cases on the delays in the family court system generally;
• the limitations on how far a court can go to investigate complex allegations and counter allegations, especially when the parties are not assisted by legal representation; and
• the increased transparency from the court, allowing the reporting of more judgements to demonstrate the workings ( and limitations) of the family court, and what they deal with on a daily basis.