F v M & Ors [2022] EWFC 64 (06 May 2022)

F v M & Ors [2022] EWFC 64 (06 May 2022)

Direct contact between F and A & B is not in their welfare interests due to ongoing risk of emotional harm, lack of insight and acceptance by F, and failure to engage in recommended psychotherapy and domestic abuse work. Non-molestation order is necessary to protect M and the children from further harm. Section...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2022] EWFC 64
Parties
Applicant: F; First Respondent: M; Second and Third Respondents: A & B (acting through Children’s Guardian, Emma Brown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Child Arrangements Order and Related Applications / Final Hearing
Outcome
Application for direct contact refused; Child Arrangements Order for virtual contact only; Non-molestation order granted; Section 91(14) order granted; Specific Issues Orders granted.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Non Molestation Order, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Parental Responsibility, Specific Issues Order
Family Law Child Arrangements Non Molestation Order Section 91(14) Children Act 1989 Parental Responsibility Specific Issues Order

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F

Applicant

M

First Respondent

A & B (acting through Children’s Guardian, Emma Brown)

Second and Third Respondents

Procedural Posture

Child Arrangements Order and Related Applications / Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether direct contact between F and children A & B is in their welfare interests
  2. 2 Whether a non-molestation order should be made against F to protect M and the children
  3. 3 Whether a section 91(14) order should be made to restrict further applications under the Children Act 1989

Ratio Decidendi

Direct contact between F and A & B is not in their welfare interests due to ongoing risk of emotional harm, lack of insight and acceptance by F, and failure to engage in recommended psychotherapy and domestic abuse work. Non-molestation order is necessary to protect M and the children from further harm. Section 91(14) order is justified to prevent further litigation and strain on the children. Limitation of F's parental responsibility and specific issues orders are necessary and proportionate to ensure children's welfare and avoid further disputes.

Court Disposition

Application for direct contact refused; Child Arrangements Order for virtual contact only; Non-molestation order granted; Section 91(14) order granted; Specific Issues Orders granted.

Orders

  • A & B to live with M; F to have virtual contact only once per week, duration set by M unless agreed otherwise.
  • F permitted to buy presents for children only on birthdays, Orthodox Christmas and Easter, non-Orthodox Christmas and Easter.