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
PX lacks capacity to conduct proceedings and make decisions regarding residence and contact due to her learning disability. There is an immediate risk of emotional harm in MX's care, and insufficient evidence of risk in FX's care or at C1. It is in PX's best interests to return immediately to C1 and for contact with MX to be supervised pending a full hearing.
Source excerpt
PX lacks capacity to conduct proceedings and make decisions regarding residence and contact. MX poses a risk of emotional and potentially physical harm to PX if contact is unsupervised. It is in PX's best interests to reside with FX during holidays and for MX's contact to be supervised by a professional or, where not possible, limited to video calls.
Source excerpt
The court found the mother posed ongoing emotional harm to the children due to her negative beliefs and conduct, lacked insight, and was unable to meet their emotional and psychological needs. The father was found to be capable and child-focused. The children’s best interests required living with their father, with managed and supervised contact with the mother only if she re-engages. The court cannot compel contact and must prioritize the children’s welfare and stability.
Source excerpt
F v M & Ors [2025] EWFC 433 (B) (24 November 2025)
The Family Court made X live with her father, refused the mother’s relocation request, ordered supervised contact only, and imposed a section 91(14) bar until age 13.
Due to established domestic abuse, ongoing high risk of harm, lack of insight, and failure to complete rehabilitation, unsupervised contact is not currently safe. Professionally supervised contact is necessary to protect the children's welfare. Passport renewal without father's consent is justified given the restraining order and practical difficulties.
Source excerpt
X's welfare can only be safeguarded by a final lives with order in favour of the father and indefinite supervised contact for the mother due to high risk of abduction, emotional harm, neglect, and mother's unaddressed mental health and drug use. Section 91(14) order is necessary to prevent further litigation causing harm to X. Mother's relocation application is dismissed due to lack of evidence and risk factors.
Source excerpt
A v R [2025] EWFC 511 (B) (03 September 2025)
The Family Court ordered supervised contact, restricted the father’s parental responsibility for three years, and imposed a three-year section 91(14) filter.
Children: Parental Responsibility [2025] EWFC 462 (29 August 2025)
The court determined child arrangements and parental responsibility issues after a disputed parentage case, removing M2’s PR for RF and AF and granting F PR.
PX (Contested final hearing), Re [2025] EWCOP 58 (T2) (14 August 2025)
The Court of Protection held that PX lacked capacity to decide residence, contact, care, and internet use, and ordered supervised contact with MX.
S & T (Children: Domestic Abuse) [2025] EWFC 312 (B) (28 July 2025)
Private law children proceedings concerning domestic abuse findings, supervised contact, cross non-molestation applications, and a s.91(14) restriction.
Explore more
