W v J
[2024] EWFC 352 (B)
AA v BA
15 August 2024
[2024] EWHC 2233 (Fam)
High Court
A mother appealed a court decision allowing her abusive ex-partner more access to their daughter. The court overturned the decision because the father’s history of violence and substance abuse put the child at risk. The father will only have limited contact until he proves he has changed.
Key Facts
- •Appeal by mother against order extending father's contact with daughter from indirect to direct contact.
- •Father had history of abuse, drug and alcohol misuse, and criminal activity, including threats with a hammer.
- •Judge at first instance ordered direct contact despite Cafcass report recommending against it due to father's concerning behavior and lack of engagement with support programs.
- •Father failed to file required statement and did not attend appeal hearing.
- •Father's recent report revealed continued substance abuse.
- •Judge at first instance failed to adequately consider domestic abuse and relevant practice directions.
Legal Principles
Welfare of the child is paramount.
Practice Direction 12D and 12J (implicitly referenced)
Courts must consider domestic abuse seriously.
Practice Direction 12D and 12J (implicitly referenced)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
Judge at first instance failed to adequately consider the father's history of abuse, substance misuse, and criminal activity, and disregarded the Cafcass report's recommendations. The father's continued non-compliance and lack of engagement further supported the decision to overturn the order for direct contact.
Order for direct contact set aside.
The order was made in contravention of the child's best interests, given the father's behaviour and lack of demonstrable improvement.
Contact to remain indirect.
This protects the child's safety and well-being considering the father's history and lack of progress.
Case remitted to a different judge in Bedford.
Ensures impartiality and a fresh perspective on the case.