F v M

F v M

Ajay should remain living primarily with M during term time and spend alternate weekends and half of school holidays with F, as this best meets his welfare needs, preserves important relationships, and avoids the significant harm of disrupting his primary carer and peer group. No change of surname is justified due to lack of evidence of benefit and potential harm. No findings of domestic abuse are made as neither party proved abuse on the balance of probabilities. A section 91(14) order is justified for three years to protect the children from further harmful litigation. No order is made for costs except for detailed assessment of the children’s publicly funded costs.

Parties
Applicant/father: F; Respondent/mother: M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 May 2025
Procedural Posture
Children Act Proceedings (private Law) / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Ajay to live with both parents: primarily with M during term time, alternate weekends and half holidays with F; no change of surname; section 91(14) order for 3 years; no order for costs except detailed assessment for children’s costs.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Section 8 Orders, Section 91(14) Orders, Change of Name, Domestic Abuse Allegations, Expert Evidence, Welfare Principle
Family Law Child Arrangements Section 8 Orders Section 91(14) Orders Change of Name Domestic Abuse Allegations Expert Evidence Welfare Principle

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F

Applicant/father

M

Respondent/mother

Procedural Posture

Children Act Proceedings (private Law) / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Ajay should move to live with F or remain primarily with M
  2. 2 Whether to permit a change of surname for the children
  3. 3 Whether to make a section 91(14) order restricting further applications

Ratio Decidendi

Ajay should remain living primarily with M during term time and spend alternate weekends and half of school holidays with F, as this best meets his welfare needs, preserves important relationships, and avoids the significant harm of disrupting his primary carer and peer group. No change of surname is justified due to lack of evidence of benefit and potential harm. No findings of domestic abuse are made as neither party proved abuse on the balance of probabilities. A section 91(14) order is justified for three years to protect the children from further harmful litigation. No order is made for costs except for detailed assessment of the children’s publicly funded costs.

Court Disposition

Ajay to live with both parents: primarily with M during term time, alternate weekends and half holidays with F; no change of surname; section 91(14) order for 3 years; no order for costs except detailed assessment for children’s costs.

Orders

  • F’s application regarding school appeal dismissed
  • No order as to where Amit lives; M to facilitate relationship between Amit and F until Amit is 16