J v K (Family) [2023] JRC 259 (14 December 2023)

J v K (Family) [2023] JRC 259 (14 December 2023)

The court determined that the child's welfare required a residence order in favour of the Mother, given her demonstrated capacity to meet the child's needs, the Child's expressed wishes, and the lack of evidence supporting unsupported contact with the Father. The Father's failure to engage with recommended interventions and unresolved safeguarding concerns justified supervised contact. Allegations of abuse did not warrant a fact-finding hearing as neither party advanced them and the Article 29 report found insufficient evidence.

Citation
[2023] JRC 259
Parties
Applicant: J; Respondent: K
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
14 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Family / Final Hearing of Cross Applications for Residence and Prohibited Steps Orders
Outcome
Residence order granted in favour of the Mother; supervised contact between the Child and Father recommended.
Legal Topics
Child Residence, Prohibited Steps Order, Child Welfare, Contact Arrangements, Fact Finding in Family Proceedings
Family Law Child Residence Prohibited Steps Order Child Welfare Contact Arrangements Fact Finding in Family Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J

Applicant

K

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Final Hearing of Cross Applications for Residence and Prohibited Steps Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a residence order should be made in favour of the Mother or Father
  2. 2 Whether contact between the Child and Father should be supervised or unsupervised
  3. 3 Whether allegations of abuse require a fact-finding hearing

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that the child's welfare required a residence order in favour of the Mother, given her demonstrated capacity to meet the child's needs, the Child's expressed wishes, and the lack of evidence supporting unsupported contact with the Father. The Father's failure to engage with recommended interventions and unresolved safeguarding concerns justified supervised contact. Allegations of abuse did not warrant a fact-finding hearing as neither party advanced them and the Article 29 report found insufficient evidence.

Court Disposition

Residence order granted in favour of the Mother; supervised contact between the Child and Father recommended.

Orders

  • Residence order in favour of the Mother
  • Supervised contact between the Child and Father to be facilitated by JFCAS