E (A Child) - Complex Fact-Finding: Allegations of Domestic Abuse and Alienating Behaviours

Aug 31, 2026

Approved Judgment of the Family Court concerning E, a child in a private law dispute involving three children and the parents’ shared parental responsibility. The hearing is a complex fact-finding exercise addressing competing narratives spanning from 2006 to the present, including allegations of domestic abuse and alienating behaviours. The judge describes the extensive documentary materials and the length of oral and written submissions, and notes the private nature of the proceedings and strict requirements for preserving the children’s anonymity.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryLetters

FormatDOCX

Pages125

Reading Time44 min

AccessFree to download

I. Introduction

Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EWFC 422 Case No: SD23P00094 IN THE FAMILY COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL Date: 16/04/2025 Before : MS JUSTICE HENKE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Re: E (A Child) (Complex Fact-Finding: Allegations of Domestic Abuse and Alienating Behaviours) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - June Venters KC and Rachel Temple (instructed by Freemans Solicitors) for the Father Charlotte Proudman, Manveet Chhina and Yasmin Omotosho (instructed by Jung & Co Solicitors) for the Mother Francesca Wiley KC and Melissa Elsworth (instructed by Wannops Solicitors) for the child, through his Children’s Guardian Hearing dates: 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 30, 31 October 2024 and 1, 4, 5, 6 November 2024 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Approved Judgment This judgment was handed down remotely at 10am on 16 April 2025 by circulation to the parties or their representatives by e-mail. The judgment is published by circulation to the National Archives at 10:30am on 5 December 2025, having awaited the judgment of the Court of Appeal in [2025] EWCA Civ 1563, published on 2 December 2025. ............................. MS JUSTICE HENKE This judgment was given in private. The judge gives permission for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of this judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media and legal bloggers, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so may be a contempt of court. Ms Justice Henke : I. Introduction I have before me a fact-finding hearing in a private law dispute which concerns the lives of three children but of which only one is the subject. They are C whose date of birth is omitted; D whose date of birth is omitted ; and E whose date of birth is omitted. E, sometimes referred to by a diminutive, is the subject child. Their parents are the Mother and the Father. They share parental responsibility. On date omitted D died. She was 14 years old. She committed suicide. The grief experienced at the death of a child cannot ever truly be imagined and no words however carefully crafted by me will ever capture the enormity of the tragedy of her death. The grief of D’s parents and her family members and their friends who gave evidence before me was obvious, visceral and raw. It hung in the air throughout the hearing. I extend my heartfelt condolences to D’s siblings, her parents, to her extended family and all who are impacted by the ripples of her life and death. This has been an exceptionally challenging case for all parties. This is a case in which there is acrimony and recrimination. That has on occasion spilled over into exchanges between the advocates. I have been presented with two competing narratives which span from 2006 until the present day. I have been asked by the mother to make findings against the father and by the father to make findings against the mother. At all times, I have reminded myself of my task. My task is to make findings of fact on the evidence before me and in accordance with the law. The papers in this case are voluminous. The annotated chronology I have had placed before me alone runs to 275 pages. Its initial iteration was agreed by the father but not the mother. The final version is now annotated on behalf of the mother. The father in his closing submissions has prepared and submitted chronologies relevant, he says, to certain issues and witnesses. I received position statements and/or opening notes from all parties. The main bundle is 1876 pages long. I have a previous proceedings bundle which contains 764 pages. There are two supplementary bundles one of 126 pages and another of 1532 pages There is a disclosure bundle of 5736 pages.

FAQs

What type of case was heard in the Family Court?

A private law fact-finding hearing in which findings of fact were to be made based on evidence and the applicable law, concerning allegations affecting the lives of children.

Who is the subject child in the judgment?

E is the subject child, and the judgment also references other children in the family, C and D.

What instructions does the judge give regarding anonymity?

The judgment states it was given in private and that the anonymity of the children and family members must be strictly preserved in any published version.

Aug 31, 2026

Upload by River Wang