JD & Anor v VB & Ors

JD & Anor v VB & Ors

The risk of destabilising A’s current placement with her father and stepmother, including the risk of the father’s mental health deteriorating or the stepmother leaving, outweighs the harm to A caused by refusing direct contact with her mother and sister. The least worst outcome for A is to continue indirect contact, with a section 91(14) order restricting further applications for four years. There is insufficient evidence to justify non-molestation injunctions against the mother or B, and the mother’s exercise of parental responsibility should be clarified but not further restricted.

Parties
Applicant: JD; Applicant: LD; 1st Respondent: VB; 2nd Respondent: B; 3rd Respondent (by Her Children’s Guardian): A
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Arrangements / Final Judgment After Rehearing on Variation of Contact Order
Outcome
Indirect contact order continued; applications for direct contact refused; section 91(14) order granted for four years; applications for non-molestation injunctions refused; family assistance order made for 12 months for life story work.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Contact Orders, Parental Responsibility, Prohibited Steps Orders, Non Molestation Injunctions, Section 91(14) Orders, Parental Alienation, Welfare of the Child
Family Law Child Law Child Arrangements Contact Orders Parental Responsibility Prohibited Steps Orders Non Molestation Injunctions Section 91(14) Orders +2 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 7 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JD

Applicant

LD

Applicant

VB

1st Respondent

B

2nd Respondent

A

3rd Respondent (by Her Children’s Guardian)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Arrangements / Final Judgment After Rehearing on Variation of Contact Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to vary an order for direct contact between the child (A) and her mother and half-sister
  2. 2 Whether to grant non-molestation injunctions against the mother and B
  3. 3 Whether to make a section 91(14) order restricting further applications

Ratio Decidendi

The risk of destabilising A’s current placement with her father and stepmother, including the risk of the father’s mental health deteriorating or the stepmother leaving, outweighs the harm to A caused by refusing direct contact with her mother and sister. The least worst outcome for A is to continue indirect contact, with a section 91(14) order restricting further applications for four years. There is insufficient evidence to justify non-molestation injunctions against the mother or B, and the mother’s exercise of parental responsibility should be clarified but not further restricted.

Court Disposition

Indirect contact order continued; applications for direct contact refused; section 91(14) order granted for four years; applications for non-molestation injunctions refused; family assistance order made for 12 months for life story work.

Orders

  • Indirect contact between A and her mother and B to continue as previously ordered
  • No direct contact ordered at this time