England and Wales Case Law

Children: Parental Responsibility

M2 never had parental responsibility for RF and AF as she did not qualify under s42 HFEA due to natural conception; PR acquired by mistake is void ab initio. M2 is not granted PR for any child due to inability to accept court findings and risk of emotional harm to the children. F is granted PR for RF and AF due to demonstrated commitment and relationship. M2's contact with RF and AF must be supervised due to risk of emotional harm. FA lives with M1 and has no contact with M2. Applications for name change, baptism, foreign passports, and unrestricted travel are refused. The application to set…

Source excerpt

• Parental responsibility
• Child arrangements orders
• Declarations of parentage
• Prohibited steps orders
• Specific issue orders
• Change of name

Read case analysis

Jakir Ahmed v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Court of Appeal case on Article 8 and concurrent family proceedings. The appeal was dismissed after the court held the tribunal was entitled to proceed without awaiting the family court outcome.

• Article 8 echr - right to family life
• Concurrent family and immigration proceedings
• Child arrangements orders
• Admissibility of new evidence
• Tribunal procedure
• Best interests of the child

Read case analysis

Leicestershire County Council v FF & Ors

Leicestershire County Council v FF & Ors [2026] EWFC 78 (B) (23 March 2026)

Family Court decision on child welfare, where CC was ordered to live with her father, but claims for care and placement orders for AA and BB were refused.

• Care orders
• Placement orders
• Child arrangements orders
• Parental responsibility
• Threshold criteria
• Sexual risk assessments

Read case analysis

J (Loss of Parental Responsibility), Re

Court of Appeal held that “father” in the Children Act 1989 means the genetic father only, and birth registration alone does not confer parental responsibility on a non-father.

• Parental responsibility
• Legal definition of father
• Birth registration
• Non-paternity declarations
• Child arrangements orders
• Human rights (article 8)

Read case analysis

J, Re (Loss of Parental Responsibility)

J, Re (Loss of Parental Responsibility) [2026] EWCA Civ 344 (20 March 2026)

The Court of Appeal held that under the Children Act 1989 only a child’s genetic father can acquire parental responsibility by birth registration, and registration alone is not enough if paternity is false.

• Parental responsibility
• Legal parentage
• Birth registration
• Declaration of parentage
• Children act 1989
• Family law act 1986

Read case analysis

S v S (No. 2)(Art 21 Welfare)

S v S (No. 2)(Art 21 Welfare) [2026] EWHC 434 (Fam) (03 March 2026)

The High Court made a final lives-with order for the mother, barred all contact with the father, restricted his parental responsibility, and imposed a five-year s.91(14) filter.

• Child arrangements orders
• Prohibited steps orders
• Specific issue orders
• Section 91(14) orders
• Domestic abuse
• Parental responsibility

Read case analysis

A & B (Children), Re

A & B (Children), Re [2026] EWFC 57 (B) (03 March 2026)

The court refused the mother’s application for the children to live with her, found her allegations against the father unproven, and ordered the children to remain with their father with indirect contact only.

• Child arrangements orders
• Prohibited steps orders
• Fact-finding hearings
• Domestic abuse allegations
• Safeguarding
• Welfare principle

Read case analysis

Michael (Foster carers versus paternal aunt), Re

Michael's welfare requires stability in his current placement with foster carers; a move to paternal aunt would likely cause emotional, psychological, and developmental harm, delaying therapy and risking long-term detriment. The special guardianship order in favour of foster carers is proportionate and necessary, with robust contact arrangements to maintain birth family ties. Change of surname to a double-barrelled name is in Michael's best interests, balancing his connection to both families.

Source excerpt

• Special guardianship orders
• Child arrangements orders
• Change of surname
• Contact arrangements
• Welfare checklist
• Parenting capacity

Read case analysis

Oxfordshire County Council v M & Ors

Threshold criteria under s31 CA 1989 are met in relation to both parents. A suffered and was at risk of significant emotional harm in the care of F, and there is a risk of harm in the care of M, but this can be mitigated by a Supervision Order and support plan. A's wishes and feelings, her emotional needs, and the risk of further harm if placed with F outweigh the risks of remaining with M. The only realistic and proportionate option is for A to remain with M under a Supervision Order, with a Child Arrangements Order specifying residence with M until age 18. A s91(14) order is justified to pr…

Source excerpt

• Care orders
• Supervision orders
• Child arrangements orders
• Section 91(14) orders
• Welfare checklist
• Threshold criteria

Read case analysis

Middlesbrough Borough Council v Mother & Ors

Middlesbrough Borough Council v Mother & Ors [2025] EWFC 502 (10 December 2025)

Care proceedings concerning four children. The court found significant harm from substance misuse, domestic abuse, mental health issues and poor insight, and made care and supervision orders.

• Care orders
• Supervision orders
• Child arrangements orders
• Prohibited steps orders
• Section 91(14) orders
• Threshold criteria

Read case analysis