Re X (No 3 Child Arrangements)

Due to the history of the mother’s behaviour, her disengagement from proceedings, and the risks posed to X, there is no evidential welfare basis to order any contact between X and her mother. The stability provided by the father and ongoing therapy are in X’s best interests. Extension of the non-molestation order is justified by the extreme history and ongoing risks.

Parties: Applicant: The Father; First Respondent: The Mother; Second Respondent: X (A Child by her Children’s Guardian Emma Huntington)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 19 March 2025
Procedural Posture: Child Arrangements and Parental Order / Final Welfare Hearing
Outcome: Application granted; orders continued and extended.
Legal Topics: Child Arrangements, Parental Responsibility, Non Molestation Orders, Therapeutic Intervention, Contact With Parent

Family Law Child Arrangements Parental Responsibility Non Molestation Orders Therapeutic Intervention Contact With Parent

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 3 Party arguments 2

Parties

The Father

Applicant

The Mother

First Respondent

X (A Child by her Children’s Guardian Emma Huntington)

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Child Arrangements and Parental Order / Final Welfare Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether X should have direct or indirect contact with her mother
2 Continuation and extension of non-molestation order
3 Adjustment of child arrangements order for school move and passport application

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application granted; orders continued and extended.

Orders

X to remain living with her father.
No order for direct or indirect contact between X and her mother except with express agreement of the father.