Legal Analysis of Child Arrangement Case Involving Allegations of Abuse and Coercive Behavior

Citation: [2023] EWFC 198
Judgment on


The case of “[2023] EWFC 198” presents a detailed legal battle over child arrangements, allegations of controlling and coercive behaviour, and several instances of alleged abuse. This contentious family law matter was presided over by Recorder Daley in the West London Family Court. The legal principles applied within this judgment offer insight into the complexities of domestic cases where allegations of abuse could impact child welfare decisions.

Key Facts

The case revolves around a 4-year-old child, A, with both parents, mother (M) and father (F), providing conflicting narratives that raise allegations of abuse, including emotional, financial, physical, and sexual. An important facet of this case is the examination of the parents’ conduct, in particular F’s anger management, which needed to be fully understood before the court could proceed with child arrangement orders.

Both parents presented allegations, with M accusing F of controlling and coercive behaviour, financial abuse, and physical threats. The Court also had to address serious claims of sexual abuse against F. M, represented by counsel, and F, appearing in person, provided detailed evidence, which Recorder Daley meticulously examined.

The judgment applied several foundational principles of family law:

  1. Burden of Proof – It was reaffirmed that the burden of proof lies with the person making the allegation.

  2. Standard of Proof – All allegations had to be proven on a balance of probabilities, adhering to the principle that there is no higher standard of proof required for grave or serious allegations.

  3. Assessment of Evidence – The Court highlighted the importance of basing findings on evidence rather than speculation, with appropriate inferences drawn from evidence when necessary. This includes how hearsay evidence should be treated, given the less strict rules in family cases.

  4. Credibility and Reliability of Witnesses – Analysis of both parties’ evidence with careful scrutiny on their reliability and credibility was paramount. The Recorder took into account the demeanour of witnesses but cautioned against relying too heavily on it.

  5. Reasons for Lying – The principle following R v Lucas [1981] QB 720 was applied, which posits that witnesses may lie for various reasons that do not necessarily mean their entire testimony is untrustworthy.

  6. Coercive and Controlling Behaviour – The case applied legal definitions and signs of coercive and controlling behaviour from the Family Procedure Rules and relevant case law, particularly “Re H-N [2021] EWCA Civ 448”.

  7. Contextualising Allegations within the Relationship – The Court was tasked with examining the wider narrative of the relationship to determine if specific incidents were part of a pattern of coercive and/or controlling behaviour.

Recorder Daley also referenced “F v M [2021] EWHC 4” for guidance on the characteristics of coercive and controlling behaviour.


The Court dismissed several of M’s allegations while upholding others. It found that F did not exert controlling or coercive behaviour before the relationship began deteriorating. Several allegations of physical threats and anger-induced actions were supported by evidence and thus upheld.

M’s allegations of financial control were not sustained due to a lack of substantive evidence. However, the Court did find credible instances of sexual abuse perpetrated by F against M.

F’s allegations of M’s coercive and controlling behaviour were not substantiated by the evidence.


In a case laden with serious allegations, Recorder Daley applied legal principles methodically to dissect each claim’s validity. The nuanced analysis emphasised that the existence of some false or exaggerated claims does not preclude the existence of actual abusive behaviour within other credible allegations. The Court’s thorough examination led to a judicious mix of upheld and dismissed claims, centred around the welfare of the child in question. This judgment reinforces the importance of a fact-driven approach, interpretation based on legal definitions, and an understanding of the behavioural patterns within abusive relationships on the decisions regarding child arrangements.

Related Summaries