W (Children)

W (Children)

The appeal was allowed because the lower court did not have the benefit of considering referral to Families Forward, a specialist organisation that could facilitate supervised contact and address parental anger. This new option warranted reconsideration of whether contact could be safely and beneficially restored.

Parties
Appellant: Father; Respondent: Mother
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Family Law Contact Application / Appeal From Refusal of Contact Order; Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; application granted
Legal Topics
Child Contact, Best Interests of the Child, Supervised Contact, Variation of Contact Orders
Family Law Child Contact Best Interests of the Child Supervised Contact Variation of Contact Orders

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Father

Appellant

Mother

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Contact Application / Appeal From Refusal of Contact Order; Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal of direct contact between father and children was justified
  2. 2 Whether the CAFCASS assessment was sufficiently thorough
  3. 3 Whether alternatives to terminating contact were adequately explored

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the lower court did not have the benefit of considering referral to Families Forward, a specialist organisation that could facilitate supervised contact and address parental anger. This new option warranted reconsideration of whether contact could be safely and beneficially restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; application granted

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed