BZ v EK

BZ v EK

Repeated applications by BZ without addressing underlying concerns constitute 'lawfare' and are likely to cause emotional harm to MN and EK; a section 91(14) order is necessary, proportionate, and appropriate to protect them from further unmeritorious litigation.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: BZ; Respondent: EK
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Family / Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed; section 91(14) order made.
Legal Topics
Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Domestic Violence, Parental Responsibility, Child Protection, Vexatious Litigation
Family Law Child Law Section 91(14) Children Act 1989 Domestic Violence Parental Responsibility Child Protection Vexatious Litigation

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BZ

Applicant

EK

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a section 91(14) Children Act 1989 order should be made to restrict further applications by BZ regarding MN's living arrangements or contact.
  2. 2 Whether the current application by BZ should be summarily dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi

Repeated applications by BZ without addressing underlying concerns constitute 'lawfare' and are likely to cause emotional harm to MN and EK; a section 91(14) order is necessary, proportionate, and appropriate to protect them from further unmeritorious litigation.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; section 91(14) order made.

Orders

  • BZ's application is summarily dismissed.
  • BZ is restricted from making further applications regarding MN's living arrangements or contact for 5 years without leave of the court.