Article’s link can be found here.

It was back in 2022 when Sir Andrew McFarlane (President of the Family Division) announced that Fact Finding hearings should no longer be the default in cases involving abuse allegations. It has taken some time for this idea to filter down to the lower courts but filter it has. More and more FNF members are reporting that judges are deciding the allegations made by the other parent do not justify a fact finding and will not affect the future plans for child-care. 

In practice fact finding hearings can often present serious problems. They encourage allegations. They exacerbate conflict. They make things more complicated. They are always backward looking when the need is to discuss what is best for the children’s future. This is usually in new situations (the parents no longer trying to live together for example). Above all they cause additional delay already outrageous by anybody’s standards. During this time things change, nearly always to the disadvantage of the children, who may be prevented from seeing one of their parents while the court finds the time and judges to deal with the issues. In addition, the ‘burden of proof,’ the ‘balance of probabilities’ is not the right one. The relevant questions are – are we sure enough that things happened that are serious enough to decide the future of the children? These things are best decided on a holistic basis by one sequence of hearings.  

One of the ways in which parents in control of the children ‘win’, is not by winning the case legally, but by exhausting the capacity of the excluded parent to continue. FoF are sometimes necessary (and even useful on occasions), but they can be misused. 

The good news, the judiciary has decided there are too many of them. Current guidance (LINK)

What do you think?

Send us feedback!