Child Law Case Laws & Precedents
Understanding key legal precedents can be a powerful tool when preparing for your family court case as a litigant in person. This page provides a curated list of significant UK family law cases and their core principles, which can help inform your arguments and strategy.
Child contact is a fundamental human right under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), guaranteeing respect for family life, not merely a discretionary family arrangement. Any obstruction to this parent-child relationship constitutes a breach of both the child's and father's human rights under the Convention. The Human Rights Act 1998 mandates that UK courts, as public authorities under Section 6, must positively facilitate and protect parent-child relationships, with restrictions requiring clear justification and proportionality. This is reinforced by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Article 24), which explicitly recognizes children's right to maintain regular contact with both parents. Courts must uphold these Convention rights, with the burden of proof on those seeking to restrict contact, as contact is a protected right, not a privilege to be earned. Below are some of useful case laws in relation to this matter.
Re C (A Child) (Direct Contact: Suspension)
[2011] EWCA Civ 521
Contact is fundamental; suspension is a last resort requiring cogent reasons and careful analysis of alternatives/steps to promote contact. We’ve used this against “child-led” drift/gatekeeping and to argue for active facilitation of contact.
Re M (Children)
[2017] EWCA Civ 2164
CoA overturned a “no direct contact” outcome; emphasised Article 8 proportionality and that courts can’t duck their duty even in very difficult community contexts. We’ve cited it for pro-contact proportionality and to show welfare analysis can’t just capitulate to hostility/pressure.
Re H-N (Children)
[2021] EWCA Civ 448
Sets the modern approach to domestic abuse in private law: look at the pattern/coercive control, ensure fair fact-finding, and don’t let tools like Scott Schedules distort the task. We’ve cited it to say the court must grapple properly with the abuse narrative and fairness before curtailing involvement.
Re A (A Child) (Relocation)
[2008] EWCA Civ 1100
This decision set out the key principles for cases involving the relocation of a parent and child. It reiterated that the child's welfare is paramount and that the court must conduct a comprehensive welfare analysis, considering all relevant factors before making a decision.
Re W (A Child) (Contact)
[2010] EWCA Civ 309
This case emphasized the significance of maintaining contact between a child and both parents. It established a strong presumption that direct contact is beneficial unless there is a clear reason to the contrary, such as a risk to the child's safety or welfare.
Re G (A Child) (Residence: Religious Observance)
[2012] EWCA Civ 1233
This case highlighted the importance of a child's right to have a relationship with both parents, regardless of their differing religious beliefs. The court confirmed that it is in a child's best interests to have contact with a non-practising parent, as long as it does not expose the child to harm or conflict.