Z (A Child) (Order for no contact), Re
[2023] EWFC 61 (B)
MLD (Summary Dismissal of Child Arrangements Application), Re
4 July 2023
[2023] EWFC 129 (B)
Family Court
A dad in prison wanted to see his sons. Because of the dad's crime and safety concerns, the judge said no to visits but allowed the mom to send the dad updates and pictures (but not share them online).
Key Facts
- •Father (F) applied for a child arrangements order (spend time with) for three boys: Michael (11), Lawrence (8), and David (5).
- •F is not Michael's father and is serving a life sentence for murder.
- •The children have lived with their mother (M) their whole lives and had no contact with F for five years.
- •M alleges domestic abuse and received an Osman Warning due to threats related to F's gang affiliations.
- •F seeks direct contact with the children at prison, while M opposes any contact due to safety concerns.
- •Cafcass provided a detailed safeguarding letter highlighting the risks of contact.
Legal Principles
Permission to apply for a child arrangements order is discretionary, considering the applicant's connection with the child, the nature of the application, and the risk of disruption.
Children Act 1989, s.10(1)(a)(ii), s.10(9)
The child's welfare is paramount when considering child arrangements.
Children Act 1989, s.1(1)
There is a presumption that parental involvement is in a child's best interests, unless it poses a risk of harm.
Children Act 1989, s.1(2A), s.1(6)(b)
Contact should only be terminated in exceptional circumstances where there are cogent reasons for doing so.
Re J-M (A Child) [2015] 1 FLR 838
The court has broad case management powers, including summary dismissal.
Family Procedure Rules 2010, r.1.4; Re AA [2019] EWFC 64
Any interference with the right to family life must be necessary and proportionate.
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8; Human Rights Act 1998
Outcomes
Father's application for permission to apply for a spend time with order in respect of Michael refused.
Negligible connection between F and Michael; significant risk of disruption to Michael's stability and wellbeing.
Father's application for a spend time with order in respect of David and Lawrence summarily dismissed.
Direct contact considered contrary to children's best interests due to risks to their emotional safety, M's safety, and lack of realistic prospect of meaningful contact.
Mother to send annual written updates (via PACT) on children's progress to father, with optional photographs; prohibited steps order preventing dissemination of photographs.
Balances father's right to know about his children with protection of their safety and M's wellbeing.