The children's dad was mean and controlling. The judge said it's too dangerous for the kids to see him directly. The dad has to send letters and gifts instead, and can't go to court to ask for more contact for three years. The judge wants to protect the children from further harm.
Key Facts
- •Proceedings concerning three children (A, 14, B and C, 10) began in 2019.
- •Long history of proceedings between parents, including a fact-finding hearing resulting in findings against Mr. K for coercive and controlling behavior, intimidation, and causing emotional and (in B's case) physical harm to the children.
- •Previous judgment: K v K (no.2) [2022] EWFC 171.
- •Children's Guardian recommended indirect contact.
- •Mother agrees with indirect contact and seeks a Section 91(14) order preventing further applications for three years.
- •Father seeks direct contact.
- •Children express reluctance to have direct contact with their father.
Legal Principles
Children's welfare is the paramount consideration.
Children Act
Outcomes
No direct contact order.
Direct contact would be harmful to the children given the father's past behavior and lack of insight and change.
Monthly indirect contact via letters, cards, and gifts.
Indirect contact provides a way to maintain a relationship while mitigating the risk of further harm.
Section 91(14) order preventing further applications for three years.
To protect the children from further litigation and provide respite from the harmful impact of the prolonged proceedings.