The Hon. Sir Jonathan Cohen :
1.I have been hearing an application by Mikias Yakob Padia (Mikias) who seeks a declaration as to whether or not the first respondent Yakub Padia (Yakub) is his parent. The second respondent to the application is Mikias’s mother Almaz Manbegirot Gebrye (“Almaz”).2.The application is brought pursuant to Section 55A Family Law Act 1986. Jurisdiction is provided by reason of Yakub being domiciled in England and Wales. 3.Mikias was born on 31 October 1985 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Almaz is Ethiopian and it is accepted that Almaz and Yakub had a sexual relationship while Yakub was working at a school in Addis Ababa. It is Yakub’s case that the relationship terminated in November 1984. Almaz says that it came to an end in April 1985 when she informed Yakub that she was pregnant by him and declined to have a termination.4.During the hearing I heard evidence from all 3 parties. I have read a number of statements from other witnesses the most material ones coming from IA and CB. I have also looked carefully at the results and reports of two DNA tests dated 13 September 2001 and 2 February 2021.5.Both DNA studies give a very high probability of Yakub being the father. However, it is vital to emphasise that the DNA tests only provide one part of the picture. The probability of paternity depends also on other evidence relevant to the case. I have to examine carefully the events of 1984-1985 as well as what happened between the parties after Mikias’s birth. To use the words of the SJE’s reply to questions prepared by Yakub:A DNA test is not an isolated source of evidence, as factors have led to the use of said test. The DNA test is taken to support the evidence already established.
- Approved Judgment
- The Hon. Sir Jonathan Cohen :
- Events of 1984-1985
- Without the technical data from the FSS report we cannot confirm that it is the same mutation but both mutations did appear on the paternal side of the DNA.
- Yes, in the case of the FSS report, you could potentially find someone after 710 tests on unrelated individuals to find a similar test. However, our testing of 25 markers now means you would have to test 21,204,093 people before you found someone with that same profile. With further testing, and increasing the number or tested markets, this number could again increase. Statistically there were -37 people in the population of India in 1985 out of a population of 784million that could have this profile. This is statistically, not a guarantee.
- There is no way to ascertain that a mutation has occurred and the mismatch is not due to other factors. However, with further testing there are ways to get even more data and strengthen the DNA reports issued. You could test related males who to eliminate them as potential fathers to the point that the only feasible explanation is a mutation.
- Yes the similarity between human to human is higher. Approximately 99.6% of the DNA is shared. The other 0.4% makes up the highly variable sections of DNA that are used in generic comparisons. This 0.4% is about 12million areas of variability in the 3.2 billion that make up the human genome.
- Yes the probability of paternity we have calculated is based on the DNA test alone. We don’t know any circumstances of the case.
- The current test suggests that they were taken from the same people but this cannot be verified without comparable technical data or collection records.
- Yes.
- A DNA test is not an isolated source of evidence, as factors have led to the use of said test. The DNA test is taken to support the evidence already established.
- Costs