F v M

F v M

The court found that the Mother breached the previous child arrangements order but had reasonable excuse due to trauma, harassment, and professional recommendations. Direct contact would cause harm to the child and Mother; indirect contact is in the child's best interests. Prohibited steps and section 91(14) orders are justified to protect welfare. Overriding parental responsibility is disproportionate and not warranted.

Parties
Applicant: F; Respondent: M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Child Arrangements and Enforcement / Final Judgment
Outcome
Child arrangements order varied to indirect contact only; prohibited steps and section 91(14) orders granted; enforcement and overriding parental responsibility applications dismissed.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Enforcement of Orders, Prohibited Steps Order, Section 91(14), Parental Responsibility, Specific Issue Order
Family Law Child Law Child Arrangements Enforcement of Orders Prohibited Steps Order Section 91(14) Parental Responsibility Specific Issue Order

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 7 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F

Applicant

M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Arrangements and Enforcement / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to enforce previous child arrangements order
  2. 2 Whether to vary child arrangements to indirect contact only
  3. 3 Whether to grant prohibited steps order

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Mother breached the previous child arrangements order but had reasonable excuse due to trauma, harassment, and professional recommendations. Direct contact would cause harm to the child and Mother; indirect contact is in the child's best interests. Prohibited steps and section 91(14) orders are justified to protect welfare. Overriding parental responsibility is disproportionate and not warranted.

Court Disposition

Child arrangements order varied to indirect contact only; prohibited steps and section 91(14) orders granted; enforcement and overriding parental responsibility applications dismissed.

Orders

  • Indirect contact only between Father and child six times a year via letters, cards, gifts.
  • Prohibited steps order preventing Father from attending school or removing child for 5 years.