A Mother v A Father & Anor [2023] EWFC 331 (B) (23 March 2023)

A Mother v A Father & Anor [2023] EWFC 331 (B) (23 March 2023)

The court found A to be a credible witness and accepted her evidence of sustained abuse and risk of FGM to C. Given the high prevalence of FGM in the family's country of origin, A's own experience, and B's conduct, the court determined there was a significant risk to C and that a Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order was necessary.

Citation
[2023] EWFC 331 (B)
Parties
Applicant: A; Respondent: B; Subject Child/second Respondent: C
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Family Law Protection Order / Judgment Following Application for Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order and Consideration of Family Law Injunction and Contact Application
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order, Non Molestation Order, Prohibited Steps Order, Coercive and Controlling Behaviour, Child Welfare, Contact Arrangements
Family Law Child Protection Domestic Violence Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order Non Molestation Order Prohibited Steps Order Coercive and Controlling Behaviour Child Welfare +1 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Applicant

B

Respondent

C

Subject Child/second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Protection Order / Judgment Following Application for Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order and Consideration of Family Law Injunction and Contact Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order is necessary for C
  2. 2 Whether to continue the Family Law injunction against B
  3. 3 Whether B should have contact with C

Ratio Decidendi

The court found A to be a credible witness and accepted her evidence of sustained abuse and risk of FGM to C. Given the high prevalence of FGM in the family's country of origin, A's own experience, and B's conduct, the court determined there was a significant risk to C and that a Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order was necessary.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Female Genital Mutilation Protection Order made until C's 18th birthday, including Prohibited Steps Order preventing B from removing C from England and Wales or A's care except as ordered by the court.
  • Family Law Act order (Non-Molestation Order) continued for two years.