Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
P & Q (Children), Re (Finding of Fact) [2026] EWFC 99 (B) (05 May 2026)
The court found the father committed domestic abuse, including verbal, emotional and controlling conduct, but rejected the father's allegation that the mother alienated the children.
R v R [2025] EWHC 3180 (Fam) (05 December 2025)
Appeal against family fact-finding findings dismissed. The High Court held the mother had a fair hearing, the vulnerable witness guidance was followed, and the findings were not undermined by error.
Nottinghamshire County Council v SV & Anor [2025] EWCOP 37 (T3) (28 October 2025)
The Court of Protection held that a fact-finding hearing was unnecessary, and made welfare orders for SV to remain at his placement with contact to MB managed by a Contact Plan.
The court found that the father engaged in coercive and controlling behaviour in the context of a marriage in decline, and committed one incident of physical violence (hitting the mother on the lip) in November 2022, but not strangulation or repeated violence. The mother was found to have exhibited alienating behaviours, failed to promote a positive relationship between the children and father, and presented false evidence (exhibit RB14) to further her case. The children suffered emotional harm due to the mother's actions.
Source excerpt
Given the significant gulf between the local authority's allegations and the parents' concessions, the absence of evidential foundation for the concessions, and the necessity for a factual determination to inform future care planning, contact, and welfare decisions, it is necessary and proportionate to conduct a fact finding hearing. The interests of the children, the complexity of care planning, and the need for a settled narrative outweigh the delay and resource concerns.
Source excerpt
The judge was wrong to vacate the fact finding hearing, direct the ISW to prepare a plan for re-establishment of contact, and order unsupervised video contact, as there remained a significant gulf between the parties' accounts relevant to risk and welfare, and the necessary procedural safeguards were not followed.
Source excerpt
F's conduct in litigation, including his failure to make reasonable concessions and the manner in which he defended the allegations, was found to be unreasonable, reprehensible, and repugnant, justifying a departure from the general rule and an order that he pay M's costs in full.
Source excerpt
A fact finding hearing is neither necessary nor proportionate for determining SV's welfare and contact arrangements; SV's clear wishes to remain at Option 4 and have limited, supervised contact with MB, combined with the agreed Contact Plan, render further factual investigation unnecessary.
Source excerpt
F v M [2025] EWFC 138 (B) (29 April 2025)
The Family Court ordered F to pay M’s full costs of £40,180 after finding his litigation conduct unreasonable and, in part, repugnant in contested fact-finding proceedings.
Appeal allowed against interim overnight contact pending a fact-finding hearing on domestic abuse allegations; contact limited to daytime unsupervised sessions.
Explore more
