Nurse v Clarke

• Jurisdiction: Barbados
• Judge: Hanschell, C.J.,William, J.
• Judgment Date: 02 June 1972
• Neutral Citation: BB 1972 HC 5
• Docket Number: No. 12 of 1972
• Court: High Court (Barbados)
• Date: 02 June 1972

Divisional Court

Hanschell, C.J. (Ag.); William, J.

No. 12 of 1972

Nurse

and

Clarke

Appearances:

J. Connell for the appellant.

W.H. Hanschell, Q.C., for the respondent.

Family Law - Paternity —

Facts: This was an appeal against the finding of a magistrate that the appellant was the father of the child of the complainant — The complaint was brought under the Affiliation Proceeding Act, 1963 — The issue was whether the magistrate was right in finding the complainant's evidence to be corroborated by the defendant's admission of sexual intercourse with the complainant prior to the date of conception —

Held: That it was not reasonable to hold that the defendant's admission of sexual intercourse with the appellant could by itself constitute corroboration — Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:

1 The respondent to this appeal gave birth to a child on August 16, 1971 and on November 8, 1971 she preferred a complaint before the magistrate at District C in which she alleged that the appellant was the father. This the appellant denied, but the magistrate, after hearing the evidence, adjudged him to be father of the child. This gave rise to the present appeal.

2 The admitted background to the case is as follows. The parties were intimate from some time in 1969 with sexual intercourse taking place between them regularly. On May 15, 1970 a male child, Alvin, was born. The appellant admitted paternity of this child and the magistrate at District C made an order against him in respect of this child.

3 However, from here on there is a conflict of evidence. The respondent alleged that she and the appellant continued to have sexual intercourse up to December 1970 and that on August 16, 1971 she gave birth to a second child. The appellant denied this and his story was that sexual relations between them ceased in January, 1970 when the respondent was pregnant with the first child.

4 Counsel for the appellant submitted to the magistrate that the evidence of the respondent was not corroborated as required by law. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent submitted that there was corroboration in the evidence of the respondent's mother and in the admission of the appellant that he had had sexual intercourse with the respondent. The respondent's mother testified that the appellant used to visit her house regularly and that this continued until the end of 1970. She also stated that she had never seen the respondent with any other man.

5 The learned magistrate in adjudging the appellant to be the father of the second child, reasoned on these lines. There was no suggestion or allegation that the respondent associated with other men and therefore she does not require corroboration as to the date of conception. And the judgments read in the Court of Appeal in Simpson v. Collinson [1964] 1 All E.R. 262 provided high persuasive authority that the alleged father's admission of sexual intercourse with the mother, albeit at some date prior to the date of conception, could corroborate the evidence of the mother as required by the Act. The magistrate went on to say that for his part he unhesitatingly accepted...