SG v KT [2025] EWFC 159 (B) (23 May 2025)

SG v KT [2025] EWFC 159 (B) (23 May 2025)

The court found no credible evidence that father physically abused J. The mother's behaviour, including repeated filming and questioning of J, amounted to emotional harm and manipulation, creating an environment encouraging false allegations against father. The welfare of J required that she live with her father and have only supervised contact with her mother until mother completes appropriate therapeutic work. The non-molestation order was refused as there was no immediate need for protection. Prohibited steps orders were necessary to prevent mother from removing J or making unilateral decisions about her care.

Citation
[2025] EWFC 159 (B)
Parties
Applicant Mother: SG; Defendant Father: KT
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Children Act 1989 Proceedings (consolidated Applications) / Final Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Final child arrangements order: J to live with father; supervised contact with mother; non-molestation order refused; prohibited steps orders granted.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements Order, Non Molestation Order, Prohibited Steps Order, Contact Supervision, Parental Alienation, Welfare of the Child
Family Law Child Arrangements Order Non Molestation Order Prohibited Steps Order Contact Supervision Parental Alienation Welfare of the Child

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SG

Applicant Mother

KT

Defendant Father

Procedural Posture

Children Act 1989 Proceedings (consolidated Applications) / Final Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether J should live with mother or father
  2. 2 Whether contact with mother should be supervised or unsupervised
  3. 3 Whether a non-molestation order should be made against father

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no credible evidence that father physically abused J. The mother's behaviour, including repeated filming and questioning of J, amounted to emotional harm and manipulation, creating an environment encouraging false allegations against father. The welfare of J required that she live with her father and have only supervised contact with her mother until mother completes appropriate therapeutic work. The non-molestation order was refused as there was no immediate need for protection. Prohibited steps orders were necessary to prevent mother from removing J or making unilateral decisions about her care.

Court Disposition

Final child arrangements order: J to live with father; supervised contact with mother; non-molestation order refused; prohibited steps orders granted.

Orders

  • J to live with her father
  • J to have supervised contact with her mother: 4 weekly sessions of 2 hours at contact centre, then fortnightly 4-hour supervised sessions in the community