Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Application by a natural father for access to his son, now aged nearly 6. The parties had had a relationship lasting from 1991-1995. There was a history of violence, resulting in the father having three convictions therefor, being twice sent to Prison. The mother was found by the Court to be suffering from post traumatic stress disorder.
The child's interests are paramount, and in general access should be ordered unless there are strong reasons why it should not. Here, were access, whether supervised or unsupervised, presently to be ordered the post traumatic stress disorder of the mother following on from the assaults would on the evidence upset the stability of the family.
The Court therefore ordered that there should be no direct access whether supervised or unsupervised until further order. Indirect contact however was ordered, with liberty to the parties to apply on a substantial change of circumstances.
This is an application by 'C' now aged 36, for access to his son 'M', now aged nearly 6.
M is the offspring of a relationship which began in 1991 when C began to cohabit with M's mother 'D' who already had two daughters born in 1986 and 1988, by a previous relationship. The parties never married.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.