Latest articles
UK Immigration Rough Sleeper Rule
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsThe UK government has recently introduced a controversial new set of rules that aim to make rough sleeping grounds for refusal or cancellation of a migrant’s...
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
View all articles
Authors

MS v MN [2017] EWHC 324 (Fam)

Sep 29, 2018, 19:53 PM
Private law children – Contact – Domestic violence – Practice Direction 12J
The mother’s appeal from an order for direct contact between the father and child was allowed.
Slug : ms-v-mn-2017-ewhc-324-fam
Meta Title : MS v MN [2017] EWHC 324 (Fam)
Meta Keywords : Private law children – Contact – Domestic violence – Practice Direction 12J
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 15, 2017, 10:06 AM
Article ID : 114122

(Family Division, Moor J, 2 February 2017)

Private law children – Contact – Domestic violence – Practice Direction 12J

The mother’s appeal from an order for direct contact between the father and child was allowed.

The parents of the, now 5-year-old, child separated in 2012 when the mother went into a refuge. There had been numerous allegations and counter-allegations ever since.

A fact-finding hearing took place in order to resolve the issue of direct contact with the father. A number of findings were made regarding violence perpetrated by the father and threats to kill the mother. The father’s appeal was dismissed.

On the issue of contact, despite the Cafcass report advising against direct contact the judge found that since violence had not been perpetrated against the child she was not at risk. A period of indirect contact was ordered followed by direct contact to be supervised or supported. The mother appealed.

The appeal was allowed. The judge directed that a s 7 risk assessment of the father should be completed and the matter remitted to the Family Court.

The judge below failed to consider Practice Direction 12J and his judgment did not address why it was right to permit direct contact at this time. The Cafcass officer had serious concerns regarding allegations of the father’s drug use and the fact that drug testing had not been completed yet. Further, given the findings of domestic violence and the father’s pattern of coercive control there was a high risk of future violence.


Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 324 (Fam)

Case No. No. ZC15P00920

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice


Date: Thursday, 2nd February, 2017

Before:

MR. JUSTICE MOOR
(In Private)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


B E T W E E N :

M S
Appellant

- and -

M N
Respondent


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Transcribed by BEVERLEY F. NUNNERY & CO.
(a trading name of Opus 2 International Limited)
Official Court Reporters and Audio Transcribers
5 New Street Square, London. EC4A 3BF
Tel: 020 7831 5627 Fax: 020 7831 7737
info@beverleynunnery.com


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


MS. V. MILLER (instructed by Aitken Harter Solicitors) appeared on behalf of the Appellant.

THE RESPONDENT appeared in Person.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


J U D G M E N T 
(As approved by the Judge) 

MS v MN [2017] EWHC 324 (Fam).rtf


For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important Family Division, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court and European courts case, subscribe to Family Law Reports.

Subscribers can log in here.

Find out more or request a free 1-week trial of the Family Law Reports.
Categories :
  • Judgments
  • Private Law Children
Tags :
FLR_cover
Provider :
Product Bucket : Family
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from