BIRTHDAY celebrations turned sour when a father assaulted his young son, a court has heard.

The man from the Haverfordwest area, who cannot be named due to a court order, appeared before local magistrates on Wednesday.

He previously denied a charge of common assault, but pleaded guilty on a basis before the trial.

Vaughan Pritchard-Jones, prosecuting, told the bench that the man had clipped his son around the side of the head.

He said: “Clearly it is always a sad situation when a father comes to court convicted of assaulting his son.”

He added that the prosecution and defence had different versions of what took place, but the child, who lives with his mother, was spending his birthday at his grandparent’s house with his father on the day in question.

The boy was upset that the family had not sung ‘happy birthday’ to him, and stated that his father got angry with him, and gave him a ‘back-hander’ which caught the corner of his eye.

The man claimed that he had clipped him across the side of the head because he was messing around.

Mr Pritchard-Jones said: “The defendant accepts he went beyond reasonable chastisement, but denies causing injury.

“It’s a sad case, the boy says he does not want to see his dad.”

Mark Layton, defending, told the court that the boy was misbehaving all day, and at one stage pulled a girl’s hair and grabbed a boy around the throat.

“The defendant intended to clip him around the ear to send a message that his behaviour was unacceptable. He may have inadvertently made contact with the complainant’s eye, it was not intentional.

“It was reckless and he did not intend to cause any injury.”

Mr Layton added that the law concerning child chastisement could be confusing, and his client would not repeat his actions, but he had been punished in a similar way when he was brought up.

Magistrates imposed a 12-month community order with 150 hours of unpaid work and ordered him to pay £400 towards court costs, plus a £85 surcharge.

A three-year restraining order was imposed, prohibiting him from contacting his son, except via a family court order or social services agreement.