Frida Dahlqvist is a busy family barrister who joined 3PB in October 2024. Frida is instructed in both Public and Private family law proceedings.
Frida is commended by clients in Chambers UK and Legal 500 alike as "very compassionate with clients", a "calm but effective advocate", whose "forensic attention to detail is second to none and really shines through in complex cases, particularly with a medical element and with "a keen eye for detail which has been an asset in complex care proceedings cases concerning factitious illness and allegations of sexual abuse."
Frida is a highly effective cross examiner. She is very experienced in representing vulnerable clients and recently completed the FLBA’s “Advocacy & the Vulnerable” training.
Frida receives many plaudits as a highly effective and approachable barrister who works collaboratively with her professional clients to ensure continuity and efficiency from the issuing of proceedings through to their conclusion. Frida is skilled in giving forceful and necessary advice to lay clients whilst being empathic and supportive. Her style of advocacy is thorough, forensic and impactful.
Frida moved from Sweden to the UK in 2006 to undertake her legal training and completed a dissertation in the LLB Law (Hons) degree on children’s legal rights and children’s status as national and international citizens. Her LLM Law focused on international human rights, gender laws and the state, children's rights, legal aspects of education and international human rights of women. Frida’s dissertation addressed the legal rights of young girls internationally, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Frida has also worked as a consultant for CRIN (Child Right International Network), carrying out research into child specific legal aid clinics in the UK and internationally, a project aiming to create an international network of clinics and a guide for how they should be run. Frida previously carried out Pro Bono work for CRIN researching the effects of payment-by-results policies on children and children’s rights.
Frida Dahlqvist is an experienced, much-requested family barrister with a strong practice in care proceedings and private law children disputes.
Frida is a highly effective cross-examiner and recently completed the FLBA’s “Advocacy & the Vulnerable” training course.
In care proceedings, Frida Dahlqvist is frequently instructed by local authorities but also has extensive experience of representing parents and children, with her instructing solicitors appreciating her excellent client care and strong ability to effectively communicate with vulnerable and challenging clients.
Frida's busy caseload has seen her advise and appear in cases involving:
Frida appeared for the local authority, led by Louise Sapstead, in a recent high profile shaken baby case in the Midlands, whose murder by a teenager was widely reported in the media.
A & B (Children) (Contested Adoption) 2022 EWFC 17: in this reported case, acted for the mother opposing the making of an adoption order after leave was granted because there had been a change of circumstances of a sufficient nature and degree and that the welfare evaluation that followed required leave to be granted. Both parents were drug and alcohol abstinent for several years and their home conditions are now very good.
A Council v K v B v B: acting for father of child after routine scans revealed the baby had rib fractures. Child had significant medical needs and was prescribed furosemide, raising the issue of how this had affected her bone strength. The court found that the force used could not be found to have been excessive and no evidence that the harm was likely to have been deliberate, malicious or intentional. Child was returned to the parents care.
A Council v D v D: Acting for the local authority in a case where a child had suffered an unexplained skull fracture. Question was whether or not a fact finding hearing would be necessary against the background of child's overall care being of a high standard.
A Council v D-W and W: Acting for the local authority in a case where children’s mother is deceased and where the oldest child, 15, has a different biological father. Until the proceedings commenced the child thought that W was her biological father and court made extensive findings about W sexually abusing, grooming and coercing the child into sexual acts. Both she and her sibling had also been smacked and hit.
A Council v. A v A v A: Acting for the mother in a case where she was alleged to have hit the youngest child with a belt and her hand numerous times. Mother was found to have frustrated efforts to provide support for the youngest child. Mother claimed that the allegations had been made by the youngest child as he had been coerced/coached by teachers and social workers to say these things as they were racist and prejudiced against her.
A Council v D v D v D v A Hospital: Frida represented the hospital which was made an intervener in the proceedings. The child had presented as very poorly some weeks after birth, was taken to the hospital and at that time rib fractures were discovered. Parents alleged that the fractures could have been caused by hospital staff, either accidentally during the birth or inflicted by a midwife whose care they expressed concerns about afterwards.
A Council v C v M v C: Acted for the local authority, and led by James Cleary, in a case of fabricated illness by the mother who then unnecessarily administered treatment, persisted in maintaining that the child had a range of allergies and illnesses and that the child needed to use a wheelchair - despite none of these being the case. The child wrongly believed that she was disabled and in pain. Mother also told the child that her brother had died as a result of which the child attended bereavement counselling, despite her brother being alive.
A Council v C v S v S v P: child (15 months old at the time of the fact finding hearing) had suffered 10 injuries that were deemed non-accidental (linear marks, bruises and red marks). Mother argued that they had been caused by Frida's client who had been present in the property supporting the mother with care of the child for the past few weeks. Other issues in the case included domestic violence, drug misuse, volatile and aggressive behaviours by the mother. At the fact finding hearing, no finding was made against her but all findings were made against the mother.
Called 2014
