H, Re [2024] EWFC 245 (B) (09 August 2024)

H, Re [2024] EWFC 245 (B) (09 August 2024)

Direct contact with father would expose child and mother to unmanageable risk of harm due to father's entrenched abusive behaviour, lack of insight, and failure to comply with court directions. Indirect contact is only appropriate at reduced frequency. Father has not demonstrated commitment, attachment, or genuine reason for parental responsibility; granting it would risk misuse. Section 91(14) barring order is necessary to protect mother and child from further litigation-induced harm.

Citation
[2024] EWFC 245 (B)
Parties
Applicant Father: N; Respondent Mother: K; Child: H
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Child Arrangements and Parental Responsibility Application / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Application for direct contact and parental responsibility refused; indirect contact ordered; section 91(14) barring order imposed.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Parental Responsibility, Domestic Abuse, Indirect Contact, Section 91(14) Barring Order
Family Law Child Arrangements Parental Responsibility Domestic Abuse Indirect Contact Section 91(14) Barring Order

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

N

Applicant Father

K

Respondent Mother

H

Child

Procedural Posture

Child Arrangements and Parental Responsibility Application / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether direct or indirect contact between father and child is appropriate given findings of domestic abuse
  2. 2 Whether father should be granted parental responsibility
  3. 3 Whether a section 91(14) barring order should be imposed to restrict further applications

Ratio Decidendi

Direct contact with father would expose child and mother to unmanageable risk of harm due to father's entrenched abusive behaviour, lack of insight, and failure to comply with court directions. Indirect contact is only appropriate at reduced frequency. Father has not demonstrated commitment, attachment, or genuine reason for parental responsibility; granting it would risk misuse. Section 91(14) barring order is necessary to protect mother and child from further litigation-induced harm.

Court Disposition

Application for direct contact and parental responsibility refused; indirect contact ordered; section 91(14) barring order imposed.

Orders

  • Father permitted to send letters, cards, and gifts to child three times a year plus birthday; mother to facilitate reading subject to appropriateness.
  • Mother to send updates to father twice a year.