C v D (private law - domestic abuse - parental alienation) [2021] EWFC B60 (30 July 2021)

C v D (private law - domestic abuse - parental alienation) [2021] EWFC B60 (30 July 2021)

Ms C has not proved on the balance of probabilities that Mr D kicked B in the stomach or pushed A off a trailer or caused him to be frightened. There is no current risk of harm to the children from Mr D. The evidence supports that Ms C has undermined Mr D’s parental responsibility and contributed to the children’s negative views of their father. The welfare of the children requires the restoration of regular contact with their father, without restrictive conditions. Applications for a section 91(14) order and a non-molestation order are refused as the statutory criteria are not met.

Citation
[2021] EWFC B60
Parties
Applicant/mother: Ms C; Respondent/father: Mr D; Child: A; Child: B
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Private Family Law – Child Arrangements and Related Orders / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Ms C’s application for variation of the child arrangements order is refused. The children are to have regular staying contact with Mr D as per the guardian’s recommendations. Applications for a section 91(14) order and a non-molestation order are refused.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements Orders, Parental Responsibility, Parental Alienation, Domestic Abuse, Fact Finding Hearings, Contact Orders, Section 91(14) Orders, Non Molestation Orders
Family Law Child Law Child Arrangements Orders Parental Responsibility Parental Alienation Domestic Abuse Fact Finding Hearings Contact Orders +2 more

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 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms C

Applicant/mother

Mr D

Respondent/father

A

Child

B

Child

Procedural Posture

Private Family Law – Child Arrangements and Related Orders / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr D poses a risk of harm to the children A and B
  2. 2 Whether Mr D kicked B in the stomach
  3. 3 Whether Mr D pushed A off a trailer or caused him to be frightened

Ratio Decidendi

Ms C has not proved on the balance of probabilities that Mr D kicked B in the stomach or pushed A off a trailer or caused him to be frightened. There is no current risk of harm to the children from Mr D. The evidence supports that Ms C has undermined Mr D’s parental responsibility and contributed to the children’s negative views of their father. The welfare of the children requires the restoration of regular contact with their father, without restrictive conditions. Applications for a section 91(14) order and a non-molestation order are refused as the statutory criteria are not met.

Court Disposition

Ms C’s application for variation of the child arrangements order is refused. The children are to have regular staying contact with Mr D as per the guardian’s recommendations. Applications for a section 91(14) order and a non-molestation order are refused.

Orders

  • Children to have fortnightly overnight contact with Mr D, building up to longer periods during school holidays.
  • No conditions attached to contact regarding alcohol, drugs, or locations.