England and Wales Case Law

X the father v Y the mother

The father has not successfully completed the therapy recommended by Dr A nor been positively re-assessed, so the risks identified in previous proceedings remain unaddressed. There is no arguable case or need for renewed judicial investigation into child arrangements. The enforcement application is an abuse of process as there is no breach of the child arrangements order by the mother; the issues raised concern the school's interpretation of the order, not the mother's conduct.

Source excerpt

• Child arrangements orders
• Enforcement of child arrangements
• Section 91(14) barring orders
• Parental responsibility
• Specific issue orders
• Permission to apply

Read case analysis

C v S

C v S [2025] EWFC 254 (16 July 2025)

Costs judgment in private Children Act proceedings. The court found the mother’s conduct unreasonable and ordered her to pay the father’s costs, with the payable proportion reduced to 50%.

• Costs in children act proceedings
• Unreasonable litigation conduct
• Alternative dispute resolution (adr)
• Expert evidence
• Contact arrangements
• Section 91(14) barring orders

Read case analysis

L v S

The father has failed to engage with the proceedings, has not complied with previous orders, and presents ongoing safeguarding risks to the child and mother. There is no evidence that contact with the father would benefit the child, and the risk of emotional harm outweighs any benefit. The child's welfare requires that there be no contact with the father and that a section 91(14) barring order be made to prevent further abusive litigation.

Source excerpt

• Child arrangements
• Contact orders
• Section 91(14) barring orders
• Safeguarding
• Indirect contact
• Parental responsibility

Read case analysis

JD & Anor v VB & Ors

JD & Anor v VB & Ors [2020] EWFC 16 (04 March 2020)

The court continued indirect contact for a child and refused direct contact, finding the risk to her stability outweighed the benefits. It also refused injunctions and made a 4-year section 91(14) order.

• Child arrangements
• Contact orders
• Parental responsibility
• Prohibited steps orders
• Non-molestation injunctions
• Section 91(14) barring orders

Read case analysis

A, B, C (Children : care orders) No. 4

A, B, C (Children : care orders) No. 4 [2018] EWFC 98 (06 April 2018)

The court refused the father permission to seek discharge of Child C’s care order, made a section 91(14) order against him, and adjourned the mother’s application pending expert assessment.

• Care orders
• Discharge of care orders
• Contact with children in care
• Section 91(14) barring orders
• Expert evidence
• Sibling placement

Read case analysis

DO & BO (Temprorary Relocation to China), Re

The High Court refused a mother permission to take her two sons to China for a holiday, finding a moderate risk of non-return and no effective safeguards.

• Temporary relocation of children
• Prohibited steps orders
• Child arrangements orders
• Section 91(14) barring orders
• International child abduction risk
• Recognition and enforcement of foreign orders

Read case analysis

G (Children), Re

The Court of Appeal dismissed a father’s challenge to a costs order in Children Act proceedings, holding that his unreasonable litigation conduct justified the order.

• Costs in family proceedings
• Unreasonable litigation conduct
• Children act 1989 section 8
• Section 91(14) barring orders
• Family-law
• Children-act-1989

Read case analysis

T (A Child: Murdered Parent), Re

T (A Child: Murdered Parent), Re [2011] EWHC B4 (Fam) (08 March 2011)

Given T's clear wishes, the risk of further emotional harm, the ongoing trauma to the family, B's limited insight and recent substance use, and the need for stability, no contact of any kind between B and T is in T's best interests. A s.91(14) order barring further applications without leave until T's sixteenth birthday is proportionate and necessary. The court will also make non-molestation and exclusion zone orders mirroring the Mental Health Tribunal's conditions to protect T and her family.

Source excerpt

• Child contact after parental homicide
• Special guardianship
• Section 91(14) barring orders
• Mental health act conditions
• Non-molestation and exclusion orders

Read case analysis

N (A Child), Re

The court refused to reopen a long-running child arrangements dispute, declined most variation requests, and held the existing consent order should remain in force.

• Residence and contact orders
• Variation of consent orders
• Section 91(14) barring orders
• Parental responsibility
• Case management in family proceedings
• Family-law

Read case analysis