David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, today successfully fought off an attempt by his former lover to delay court proceedings in which he is seeking parental access to her two-year-old son.
At the High Court in London today Mr Justice Ryder rejected the argument that for health reasons Kimberly Quinn, who is seven months pregnant and in hospital, was unable to get a fair hearing unless the case was adjourned until next April.
Mrs Quinn, 44, claimed at a private hearing yesterday that taking part in the proceedings, which are imminent, would put her own health and that of her unborn second child at risk, as well as affecting the welfare of her son, whom Mr Blunkett claims is his.
But the judge said that, on the evidence, Mrs Quinn was not incapacitated from giving instructions to her lawyers and "was able to take a good part in these proceedings until days, if not hours, before the hearing".
In particular, said the judge, Mrs Quinn gave firm instructions in relation to the paternity of the child, which she contested.
Rejecting Mrs Quinn's request for an adjournment, Mr Justice Ryder said that any delay in conciliation proceedings aimed at resolving the dispute would be "damaging to the relationship" between Mr Blunkett and the boy.
Mr Blunkett, who was not in court, said afterwards: "I'm naturally relieved at today's judgment so I can continue my attempts to gain access to my son."
The case centres around two applications made by Mr Blunkett on November 11, for a parental responsibility order and a contact order. So far the case has been heard in private, since any child involved in family court proceedings is normally guaranteed anonymity.
The judge was asked by Mr Blunkett to make today's judgment public to set certain facts out in the open and ensure public confidence in the family justice system. Mrs Quinn opposed that application.
Mr Blunkett wanted in the public domain the fact that he has never asked for custody of the child nor for DNA tests to prove paternity, contrary to press reports.
The judge said that Mrs Quinn disputes paternity, which implies that the court will have to address that issue before it can consider Mr Blunkett's two applications.
Even though the judge referred to the boy as "A" and expressed the hope that journalists would not focus attention on the child, Mr Blunkett named the child in his statement.
"I have never wanted anything about my private life and [A's] paternity to be in the public domain and would never have gone to the courts if there were another way of getting informal access to him," he said.
He added: "I still hope this may be possible as I have not seen [A] since August. As forthcoming court hearings will be held in private, I will not be commenting further on these personal matters and I hope everyone concerned for [A's] welfare will do the same."
Mr Blunkett had a three-year affair with Mrs Quinn that started in 2001, shortly after her marriage to a successful British publishing executive, and ended this summer.
In a leak to a Sunday newspaper last week, Mrs Quinn made a series of accusations against the Home Secretary, including that he had pushed through a visa application for her son's Filipina nanny.
That allegation is the focus of an independent review by a retired civil servant, but in the meantime Mr Blunkett's political foes have been questioning how he can be expected to continue his ministerial duties properly while at the same time fighting his child access battle.
Despite the row over the mixing of his public and private duties, Mr Blunkett used his official spokesman to give journalists his view of events outside the High Court today.
"The only reason there's a judgment today is that Kimberly Quinn made an application in a private hearing last week. The reason it's being heard in public is because the judge decided there were too many myths in the public domain," the spokesman said.
He also confirmed that Mr Blunkett was in court 47 of the Royal Courts of Justice yesterday for just over two hours, which means he must have slipped past reporters covering the end of George Galloway's legal battle against The Daily Telegraph.
Asked if private difficulties were stopping the Home Secretary from performing his job, the spokesman said: "Virtually all of us have issues in our private lives which can sometimes be demanding and difficult. We're all professional and we can all manage to do our jobs. I don't think anyone has noticed over the last four months that they have seen any less of David Blunkett."
Today's ruling will come as a blow to Mrs Quinn and her husband, the Vogue publisher Steven Quinn. Mr Quinn pleaded for a ceasefire yesterday after his wife was admitted to a London hospital suffering stress, said to have been brought on by dispute.
Speaking outside his London home, Mr Quinn defended his wife and appealed again for her to be left alone. He said: "She is not the greatest sinner this country has produced. It's not really fair to keep on saying that, 'Oh my God, it's terrible', or whatever. We must have a sense of humanity, fairness, justice and reasonableness."
"The issue really is that when Kimberly has her next child in February and when she can be rational, together and reasonable, we will deal with this."
Fellow Cabinet members continued to rally to Mr Blunkett's support. Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, said that the Home Secretary would be getting on with his job as usual.
He told GMTV: "I do not think there is any evidence that he is not doing his job. In fact, he is not being diverted from continuing to do every aspect of his job.
"He is a man of great character and great integrity and he will keep doing his job to the best of his ability, and the best of his ability is something that is to the credit of our country."
The Spectator magazine, which has given Mrs Quinn maternity leave, today laid the blame for the row with Mr Blunkett, saying that he first exposed the relationship by leaks to the press in August.
"Tabloids cannot publish kiss and tell stories without the cooperation of one of the parties involved," the magazine said in a leader published today.
"And any analysis of the quotes contained within the original story published in the News of the World in August must confirm that in this case it was Mr Blunkett who co-operated."
The Spectator's editor, Boris Johnson, an opposition Conservative Member of Parliament and married man, was sacked from the Tory front bench last month after news broke that he had had his own affair with a female columnist on the magazine.
