P (a child) (dismissal of application – abusive applicant), Re
[2023] EWFC 86 (B)
SP v WR & Anor
3 May 2024
[2024] EWFC 93
Family Court
A long court battle over a child ended with the dad getting very limited supervised visits because of his behavior. The mom can now travel to another country with the child because the judge doesn't think she'll run away with her. The dad can't take the mom to court again without permission for several years.
Key Facts
- •Custody battle between parents (SP and WR) over their 10-year-old daughter (J).
- •Extensive litigation history spanning several years with numerous applications.
- •Central issues: child arrangements, discharge of prohibited steps order (PSO) restricting mother's travel to country XX (Non-Hague Convention country), and section 91(14) Children Act 1989 order to prevent future applications.
- •Significant evidence in video and audio form, including recordings of the father questioning the child.
- •Allegations of child abuse and parental misconduct from both sides.
- •Mother has strong cultural ties to country XX.
Legal Principles
Child's welfare is paramount.
Children Act 1989, s.1(3)
Presumption that child's welfare is advanced by relationship with both parents unless contrary shown.
Children Act 1989, s.1(2A)
Orders only made if required.
Children Act 1989, s.1(5)
Burden of proof on party making allegations.
Common law principle
Considerations for permission to travel to Non-Hague Convention country.
Re R (A Child) [2013] EWCA Civ 115
Considerations for section 91(14) Children Act 1989 order.
Re P (section 91(14) Guidelines) [1999] 2 FLR 573 and PD12Q
Considerations regarding domestic abuse in child arrangements.
PD12J
Assessing witness credibility.
R v Lucas [1981] QB 720 and Re A, B & C (Children) [2021 EWCA Civ 451
Outcomes
Substantially reduced supervised contact between father and child.
Father's behaviour, including inappropriate questioning of the child and online posts, caused significant emotional harm.
Prohibited Steps Order (PSO) discharged for mother, but maintained for father.
Low risk of mother abducting the child to country XX, balanced against benefits of travel for cultural reasons.
Section 91(14) order made to prevent further applications by father.
To allow child emotional recovery and halt prolonged litigation.
Family Law Act order prohibiting father from contacting mother or going near her residence.
To protect mother from father's behaviour.