In Family law cases relating to children their welfare is usually considered to be of the utmost importance, and the court’s primary focus tends to be in ensuring that decisions serve their best interests.
We recently represented a father, a Romanian national residing in England, who sought to maintain contact with his child despite facing rather serious challenges. His partner, also a Romanian national living here, had raised unsubstantiated allegations of domestic violence against him and there were concerns that she intended to relocate the child out of the United Kingdom without his consent. This case study explores the legal strategies and principles that led to a successful outcome, ensuring that the father retained significant and regular contact with his child and relocation was no longer pursued.
The father approached IMD Solicitors LLP when his partner began preventing him from seeing their child, raising allegations of domestic violence. The situation was further complicated by the fear that the mother might relocate the child to Romania without the father’s consent. At the start of the proceedings, there was an ongoing police investigation into the domestic violence allegations made against our client. However, after the father informed the police that he was, in fact, the victim of domestic abuse, the investigation was concluded with no further action against him.
The mother’s allegations were not substantiated, and this became a critical point in the ensuing legal battle. The court was initially inclined to consider whether a fact-finding hearing was necessary to address these allegations, given the recognition that the police consider allegations in the context of a stricter standard of proof. The listing of a fact-finding hearing in the Family Court could have delayed the resolution of the contact dispute significantly. The court had listed a hearing to consider the need for a fact-find, with the parties having filed and served evidence beforehand.
At the hearing, during which the client was represented by IMD’s In-house counsel, the court was invited to consider the legal context in which the necessity of a fact-finding hearing was to be considered. In particular Practice Direction 12J of the Family Procedure Rules and guidance from the Court of Appeal in K v K were dealt with in detailed and forceful written and oral submissions. As a result of these submissions, the court agreed that a fact-finding hearing was not necessary and that the parties ought to come to an agreement in relation to the appropriate arrangements for the subject child.
As a result of that decision, the case was resolved at that same hearing and the father’s contact resumed with his child very quickly thereafter.
In Family law disputes, especially those involving allegations of domestic abuse, it is vital to keep the child’s welfare at the forefront and to draw the focus away from irrelevant and unsubstantiated allegations which are being used as a barrier to contact. This case highlights the importance of robustly challenging unsubstantiated allegations and ensuring that the focus remains on what is best for the child. The successful outcome for the father, who now enjoys significant and regular contact with his child, illustrates the effectiveness of a well-prepared legal strategy that leverages relevant laws and precedents.
At IMD Solicitors LLP, we are committed to protecting the rights of parents and ensuring that the welfare of children remains paramount in all legal proceedings. This case serves as an example of how strategic legal intervention can lead to positive outcomes even in complex and contentious situations.
This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. Please note that the law may have changed since this article was published.
Talk to us today 
CONTACT US TODAY
0330 107 0107