A judge who allowed Sara Sharif to live with the father who brutally murdered her was previously criticised by a High Court judge over a “fundamentally flawed” hearing regarding another child.
Judge Alison Raeside, Judge Peter Nathan and Judge Sally Williams were named on Friday as the three judges involved in family court proceedings related to the care of the 10-year-old between 2013 and 2019 after a Court of Appeal ruling overturned a ban on the media identifying them.
Sara’s father, Urfan Sharif, and stepmother, Beinash Batool, were jailed for life for her murder in December, with minimum terms of 40 years and 33 years respectively, while her uncle, Faisal Malik, was jailed for 16 years after being convicted of causing or allowing her death.
The last of three sets of proceedings saw Sara placed in the home in Woking, where she later died in the summer of 2023 after a campaign of abuse in which she suffered a catalogue of 70 injuries, including 25 fractures, human bite marks and burns.
In a controversial ruling in December, Mr Justice Williams said the media could not identify three judges who presided over a string of historical court cases before the schoolgirl’s death, citing a “real risk” of harm to them from a “virtual lynch mob”. He ruled they “acted within the parameters that law and social work practice set for them”.
But after several media organisations challenged the ban in the interests of open justice.
It has now emerged that Judge Raeside’s conduct was previously criticised by a High Court judge over a separate case involving another child.
In a ruling published in 2019, Justice Newton outlined “serious charges” raised against Judge Raeside by the child’s mother, including accusations of behaviour that was “unfair, lacked transparency and was procedurally irregular”.
Justice Newton emphasised that he did not take issue with Judge Raeside’s decision to move the child into their father’s care and believed she was “endeavouring to do her very best for this boy”.
The judge instead described the issue raised as one of “transparency and fairness” regarding Judge Raeside’s communications with a children’s charity, which neither parent were made aware of.
As a result, Justice Newton, allowed an appeal of Judge Raeside’s decision.
He added: “It is, I regret to say, a matter which has caused me very considerable anxiety.”
Judge Raeside, who remains an active judge, dealt with the majority of the proceedings related to Sara, with judges Nathan and Williams – who have both since retired – involved to a lesser degree.
The first set of proceedings was told that Surrey County Council had “a number of concerns” over the care Sara’s mother Olga Sharif and father provided Sara’s two older siblings, known only as Z and U, and were likely to provide to Sara.
Judge Raeside approved that the children be placed under supervision orders, meaning they stayed in their parents’ care – a position supported by the council, the children’s guardian and Sara’s parents.
In November 2014, after Z was found with an arm injury consistent with an adult bite mark, all three children were taken into police protection.
Olga Sharif later accepted a caution after being charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
At the end of the same set of proceedings, a hearing before Judge Raeside was told that the authority was “extremely concerned” that Sara and U were “likely to suffer significant emotional and physical harm in their parents’ care”, as both alleged the other was violent.
Despite the allegations, the council still concluded that “the risk can be managed” if Sara was returned to her mother’s care with supervised contact with her father, with support from a guardian. Judge Raeside approved the plan in May 2015.
In 2019, Sara was moved to the property where she was later murdered, following her accusations of physical abuse by her mother, which were never proved.
In a report for a final hearing in October 2019, a social worker told the court that they assessed that “Urfan and Beinash are able to meet Sara and (U’s) needs for safety, stability, emotional warmth and guidance”, adding that Urfan Sharif “appears to have the children’s welfare at heart”.
The move was also supported by the children’s guardian and Sara’s parents and was approved by Judge Raeside.
