Re C [2026] EWCA Civ 1216: What does the latest Court of Appeal decision mean for parents?
A recent Court of Appeal decision has provided important guidance on how the new Child Focused Court (CFC) approach should operate in private children cases, particularly where domestic abuse is alleged or established.
The case, Re C [2026] EWCA Civ 1216, is the first Court of Appeal decision to consider the CFC model, which is now operating across many regions to include Wales, Birmingham, West Midlands, and is being rolled out more widely.
The Court of Appeal made clear that the CFC approach does not change the underlying law. In particular, Practice Direction 12J continues to apply fully where domestic abuse is an issue.
The court must still consider:
- the nature and pattern of any alleged abuse;
- the impact of the abuse on the child and the other parent;
- any risk of future harm; and
- whether arrangements for spending time with the other parent can safely take place.
Importantly, the court should not automatically assume that contact is appropriate simply because a child wants to see a parent.
Equally, the existence of domestic abuse does not automatically mean that contact must stop. Each case must be decided according to the individual child’s welfare and the evidence of risk.
Does every allegation of domestic abuse require a fact-finding hearing?
No
The Court of Appeal confirmed that a fact-finding hearing should only take place where determining the allegations is necessary to enable the court to make a proper welfare and risk assessment.
Where relevant facts are already admitted or sufficiently established, a separate fact-finding hearing may not be necessary. In this case the father has admitted to most of the allegations.
This is particularly important under the CFC model, which aims to reduce unnecessary litigation and focus the court’s attention on the issues that genuinely matter to the child.
However, a more streamlined process does not mean that allegations of domestic abuse can simply be brushed aside. Where abuse is relevant to the welfare decision, the court must properly understand its nature, impact and potential consequences.
What about Cafcass recommendations?
The judgment also reinforces that a Cafcass recommendation is not determinative.
The final decision remains that of the judge, who must carry out their own welfare assessment. If the court departs from a professional recommendation, it should explain why.
The judgment also emphasises the importance of applying the welfare checklist and not just stating that it has been considered.
What does this mean for parents?
The decision is a useful reminder that there is no one-size-fits-all approach to child arrangements.
The focus should be on the individual child, their welfare and any risks arising from the particular circumstances of the family.
Where domestic abuse is involved, the court must carefully consider whether and how arrangements for spending time with the other parent can operate safely.
The CFC model is intended to make children proceedings more focused, proportionate and child-centred. Re C confirms that this must not come at the expense of properly addressing domestic abuse or ensuring procedural fairness.
If you are separating and have concerns about arrangements for your children, particularly where there has been domestic abuse, obtaining legal advice at an early stage can help you understand the options available to you and your children. Contact us at [email protected]
