High Court makes declaration of parentage against former BATUK soldier in Re YZ DNA case

The High Court has made a declaration of parentage under section 55A of the Family Law Act 1986 in Re YZ (Declaration of Parentage: BATUK: DNA Evidence) [2026] EWHC 1601 (Fam), finding that a former British Army soldier is the biological father of a child born to a Kenyan woman in 2019. The respondent's persistent denials and sustained challenge to the integrity of the DNA evidence ultimately failed.

Mr Justice Poole delivered judgement on 26 June 2026 following a contested hearing on 5 June. The applicant, RS, a Kenyan national, claimed that the respondent, UVW, was the father of her son YZ, conceived during the period when UVW was stationed with the British Army Training Unit Kenya (BATUK) at Nanyuki. The respondent denied paternity throughout, having initially told the court that he had never met the applicant.

The DNA evidence

The proceedings arose from a project led by solicitor James Netto, who in December 2024 travelled to Nanyuki with a team including Professor Denise Syndercombe-Court, Professor of Forensic Genetics at King's College London, to collect DNA samples from children whose mothers alleged that BATUK servicemen were their biological fathers. Approximately twenty children were included in the initial cohort.

Cross-referencing YZ's sample against the publicly available Ancestry.com database identified UVW as the putative father. A comparative DNA analysis, conducted after UVW provided a sample at King's College London on 18 December 2025, produced results described by Professor Syndercombe-Court as over one billion times more likely if UVW were YZ's father than if an unrelated man of East African heritage were responsible. The corresponding probability of paternity exceeded 99.9999999%.

Chain of evidence

UVW mounted a sustained challenge to the reliability of the sampling process. He pointed to a date discrepancy in Professor Syndercombe-Court's report and argued that inconsistent labelling on his sample containers indicated that his sample had been exchanged with that of another man. The court rejected both contentions.

On the dating discrepancy, Poole J found that the professor had made a simple typing error of no material consequence, corrected by hand and incorporated into a retyped report. On the labelling point, the judge described UVW's argument as requiring the coincidental attendance at King's College London, on the same day, of a different individual sharing at least two of the respondent's three names who also happened to be YZ's biological father. The chain of evidence was found to be secure beyond reasonable doubt.

Credibility

Central to the court's assessment was UVW's evolving account. Having told the then President of the Family Division in March 2026 that he had never met the applicant, UVW was confronted with a photograph of the parties together at a casino and accepted that they had met on one occasion. He continued to deny any sexual relationship.

Poole J found that UVW had knowingly misled the court, his concessions limited to what the evidence compelled him to admit. By contrast, RS was found to be entirely credible. Her account of an ongoing sexual relationship, including intercourse during the likely window of conception in June and early July 2018, was corroborated by UVW's own acceptance that he had been stationed at BATUK during that period.

A closing submission by UVW, inviting the court to refuse relief on public policy grounds on the basis that RS had misled the court, was rejected. The declaration of parentage was made accordingly.

The judgement is understood to be the first of several applications arising from Netto's December 2024 visit to Nanyuki to result in a contested hearing.

Re YZ (Declaration of Parentage: BATUK: DNA Evidence) [2026] EWHC 1601 (Fam). Mr Justice Poole. 26 June 2026. Mavis Amonoo-Acquah (instructed by The International Family Law Group LLP) for the applicant. Respondent in person.