B (change of residence; parental alienation), Re [2017] EWFC B24 (22 March 2017)

B (change of residence; parental alienation), Re [2017] EWFC B24 (22 March 2017)

The court found that Mrs. B has emotionally harmed IB by alienating her from her father and preventing a meaningful relationship, despite expert and independent evidence that contact is safe and in IB's best interests. The lack of contact has not alleviated IB's anxiety, and the mother's narrative continues to distort IB's perception. The court concluded that a change of residence to the father is necessary to protect IB's welfare and enable her to have a relationship with both parents, as the mother is unwilling or unable to facilitate this. The court declined to make a s.91(14) order as the father has not made repeated or vexatious applications.

Citation
[2017] EWFC B24
Parties
Applicant/father: DB; Respondent/mother: HB; Child (subject of Proceedings): IB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Private Law Children Proceedings (residence/contact) / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Order for change of residence: IB to live with her father. No s.91(14) order made. Further hearing to review arrangements. CAFCASS to appoint new Guardian. Both parents to seek help from recommended organisation.
Legal Topics
Residence Orders, Contact Orders, Parental Alienation, Welfare of the Child, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989
Family Law Child Law Residence Orders Contact Orders Parental Alienation Welfare of the Child Section 91(14) Children Act 1989

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DB

Applicant/father

HB

Respondent/mother

IB

Child (subject of Proceedings)

Procedural Posture

Private Law Children Proceedings (residence/contact) / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether IB should reside with her father or mother
  2. 2 Whether contact with the father should be ordered
  3. 3 Whether a s.91(14) order should be made to restrict further applications

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Mrs. B has emotionally harmed IB by alienating her from her father and preventing a meaningful relationship, despite expert and independent evidence that contact is safe and in IB's best interests. The lack of contact has not alleviated IB's anxiety, and the mother's narrative continues to distort IB's perception. The court concluded that a change of residence to the father is necessary to protect IB's welfare and enable her to have a relationship with both parents, as the mother is unwilling or unable to facilitate this. The court declined to make a s.91(14) order as the father has not made repeated or vexatious applications.

Court Disposition

Order for change of residence: IB to live with her father. No s.91(14) order made. Further hearing to review arrangements. CAFCASS to appoint new Guardian. Both parents to seek help from recommended organisation.

Orders

  • IB to reside with her father (DB)
  • Arrangements for contact with mother (HB) to be determined and reviewed