FY v MY & Ors

FY v MY & Ors

Direct, unsupervised contact between FY and the children is not in their best interests due to the real risk of physical and emotional harm, FY's refusal to engage with supervision or therapeutic intervention, and his manipulative and controlling behaviour. The children's welfare requires a no direct contact order,...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: FY; 1st Respondent: MY; 2nd 4th Respondents: K, L & M (Children) (By their Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Private Law Children Proceedings Under Children Act 1989 / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing
Outcome
Application for direct contact refused; no direct contact order made; section 91(14) order granted for two years; indirect contact permitted subject to strict limitations.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Contact Orders, Domestic Violence, Section 91(14) Restrictions, Welfare of the Child, Supervised Contact, Emotional Harm, Physical Abuse
Family Law Children Law Child Arrangements Contact Orders Domestic Violence Section 91(14) Restrictions Welfare of the Child Supervised Contact +2 more

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FY

Applicant

MY

1st Respondent

K, L & M (Children) (By their Guardian)

2nd 4th Respondents

Procedural Posture

Private Law Children Proceedings Under Children Act 1989 / Final Judgment After Contested Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether direct contact between FY and the children is in their best interests
  2. 2 Whether contact should be supervised or unsupervised
  3. 3 Whether a section 91(14) order restricting further applications is justified

Ratio Decidendi

Direct, unsupervised contact between FY and the children is not in their best interests due to the real risk of physical and emotional harm, FY's refusal to engage with supervision or therapeutic intervention, and his manipulative and controlling behaviour. The children's welfare requires a no direct contact order, with only limited, structured indirect contact. A section 91(14) order restricting further applications for two years is necessary and proportionate to protect the children from further litigation-induced harm.

Court Disposition

Application for direct contact refused; no direct contact order made; section 91(14) order granted for two years; indirect contact permitted subject to strict limitations.

Orders

  • No direct (face-to-face) contact between FY and the children until further order or K's 18th birthday.
  • Indirect contact limited to one hour per week by telephone, divided as 15 minutes per child and 15 minutes together; no FaceTime, Skype, texting or social media contact.