D and B: Coercive and Controlling Counter Allegations, Re
[2024] EWFC 232 (B)
A (a child), Re
29 November 2023
[2023] EWFC 198 (B)
Family Court
Mom accused Dad of being mean and hurting her. A judge listened to everyone and decided some of Mom's accusations were true, but not all. The judge said Dad was immature and angry, but he didn't always mean to be controlling. The most important thing was to keep the little girl safe.
Key Facts
- •Case concerns a 4-year-old girl, A, and parental conflict regarding the father's (F) time with her.
- •Mother (M) made allegations of coercive control and sexual abuse against F; F made counter-allegations.
- •Both parents are professionals; marriage was arranged.
- •Relationship deteriorated in late 2021, leading to separation and divorce.
- •Multiple applications for non-molestation, occupation, and child arrangements orders were filed.
- •A fact-finding hearing was held to determine the truth of the allegations.
- •M sought to introduce allegations of sexual abuse shortly before the hearing.
- •The court considered numerous witness statements and evidence, including CCTV footage.
Legal Principles
The burden of proof lies with the person making the allegation.
None explicitly stated, but implied throughout the judgment.
Allegations must be proven on the balance of probabilities.
None explicitly stated, but implied throughout the judgment.
Findings must be based on evidence, not speculation.
None explicitly stated, but implied throughout the judgment.
Court assesses witness reliability and credibility, considering demeanour, consistency, and alignment with known facts.
Re B-M (Children: Findings of Fact) [2021] EWCA Civ 1371; Re M [2013] EWCA Civ 1147
Lying about some matters doesn't automatically invalidate all testimony.
R v Lucas [1981] QB 720
Contemporaneous accounts are more reliable than later recollections.
None explicitly stated, but implied throughout the judgment.
Analysis shouldn't be based solely on criminal law principles; focus is on the impact on child welfare.
None explicitly stated, but implied throughout the judgment.
Definition and assessment of coercive and controlling behaviour.
Re H-N [2021] EWCA Civ 448; F v M [2021] EWHC 4
Not all directive or assertive behaviour constitutes abuse; intention and harmful impact are key.
Re H-N [2021] EWCA Civ 448
Cumulative effect of a pattern of acts should be assessed when considering coercive/controlling behaviour.
F v M [2021] EWHC 4
Outcomes
The court made detailed findings of fact regarding various allegations of abuse and controlling behaviour.
The court carefully weighed the evidence from all witnesses, considering inconsistencies and inherent probabilities, to determine the truth of the allegations on the balance of probabilities.
Most allegations of controlling and coercive behaviour by F were not upheld.
While F exhibited apathy and immaturity, the evidence did not support a finding that these actions were intended to control or coerce M.
Several allegations of F's angry outbursts and verbal abuse were upheld.
The court found M's evidence more credible in these instances, noting that F’s anger, while not intended to be controlling, created a hostile and frightening environment.
Some allegations of sexual abuse by F were upheld.
Despite limited detail, the court found M's testimony more believable regarding incidents of non-consensual sexual acts.