Reuben (A Child), Re [2025] EWFC 392 (B) (30 September 2025)

Reuben (A Child), Re [2025] EWFC 392 (B) (30 September 2025)

The court found that Reuben’s welfare required a change in the pattern of residence, with the majority of term-time spent with his father, due to the father’s ability to provide stability, meet Reuben’s physical, emotional, and educational needs, and support his relationship with both parents. The mother’s evidence was inconsistent and overly reliant on her own narrative and Reuben’s wishes, which were found to be heavily influenced by her. The court determined that the week-on/week-off arrangement was not in Reuben’s best interests, and that the mother’s repeated litigation and obstruction of contact justified a section 91(14) order to prevent further harmful proceedings.

Citation
[2025] EWFC 392 (B)
Parties
Applicant: Daniel; Respondent: Jane; Subject: Reuben (A Child)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Child Arrangements Order (family Law) / Final Hearing and Judgment
Outcome
Child Arrangements Order made: Reuben to live with both parents, majority of term-time with father; section 91(14) order imposed; specific orders on contact and school attendance.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements Order, Residence and Contact, Section 91(14) Orders, Welfare Checklist, Autism and Neurodiversity, Parental Responsibility, Change of Residence, School Attendance
Family Law Child Arrangements Order Residence and Contact Section 91(14) Orders Welfare Checklist Autism and Neurodiversity Parental Responsibility Change of Residence +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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel

Applicant

Jane

Respondent

Reuben (A Child)

Subject

Procedural Posture

Child Arrangements Order (family Law) / Final Hearing and Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there should be a change of residence for the child
  2. 2 What time the child should spend with the non-resident parent
  3. 3 Which school the child should attend

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Reuben’s welfare required a change in the pattern of residence, with the majority of term-time spent with his father, due to the father’s ability to provide stability, meet Reuben’s physical, emotional, and educational needs, and support his relationship with both parents. The mother’s evidence was inconsistent and overly reliant on her own narrative and Reuben’s wishes, which were found to be heavily influenced by her. The court determined that the week-on/week-off arrangement was not in Reuben’s best interests, and that the mother’s repeated litigation and obstruction of contact justified a section 91(14) order to prevent further harmful proceedings.

Court Disposition

Child Arrangements Order made: Reuben to live with both parents, majority of term-time with father; section 91(14) order imposed; specific orders on contact and school attendance.

Orders

  • Reuben to live with both parents, with a 9:5 term-time split in favour of the father.
  • Mother to have alternate weekends and Wednesday overnight contact.