The Cafcass Report Said Shared Care. The Judge Said Relocation.

Many parents going through the family court treat the Cafcass recommendation as the likely outcome. If Cafcass backs you, you relax. If Cafcass is against you, you assume the case is lost.

A recently published judgment shows why that assumption is risky. Cafcass recommended shared care. The judge rejected that recommendation and allowed one parent to move a young child several hundred miles away. The reasons tell litigants in person a lot about how judges actually weigh the evidence, including the behaviour of both parents.

What the case was about

The parents had separated and shared a settled routine. The child lived mainly with one parent and saw the other after school and on alternate weekends. When the resident parent planned to move away to live with a new partner, both parents applied to the court.

• The parent wanting to move asked for permission to relocate the child.
• The other parent asked for a shared care order and an order preventing the move.

Cafcass considered four options and recommended equal shared care where the child already lived. The judge made a different decision. The move was permitted, the child would live with the relocating parent, and the other parent was given regular video calls, several weekends a month and a large share of the school holidays, with the relocating parent contributing towards travel costs.

Why the judge did not follow Cafcass

A judge must give reasons for departing from a Cafcass recommendation. Here the judge gave three.

1. The direct work with the child was flawed. The child was shown only two options. One of them was the resident parent moving away and leaving the child behind, which nobody had ever proposed. The judge found this exercise emotionally harmful and said the child's reaction to it could not be a reliable guide to their true feelings.
2. A key comment was misread. A school professional said the child would "grieve" the move. The judge found this meant losing frequent time with either parent, not losing one parent altogether, and that the professional had not seen the contact proposals.
3. The child's anxiety came from the adults. The judge found both parents had contributed to the child's fear of losing a parent. Giving heavy weight to that anxiety meant giving weight to the adult conflict that caused it.

The legal test did not change. The child's welfare was paramount, and the judge compared each realistic option side by side before choosing the one that best met the child's needs.

Lessons for litigants in person

A Cafcass report is evidence, not the decision. The judge weighs it alongside everything else. You can challenge how Cafcass reached its view, including how the child was spoken to, but you need specific reasons.

Your proposals are treated as evidence of your motives. The relocating parent had first proposed a long period with no contact after the move. The judge said that, if it had not been dropped, it might well have shown a wish to exclude the other parent. Extreme proposals can sink an otherwise strong case.

Overstating risk damages your credibility. Many allegations were found unsubstantiated. The judge noted they were raised around the time the move was being planned, and that unsupervised contact had been allowed throughout. If you describe someone as dangerous, the court will ask why your own actions do not match.

What you say to your child is examined closely. The judge found one parent had told the child they would not see them after a move, and had given the child a gift with a message about loyalty. The court also rejected a recording where a parent had steered the child's conversation to gather evidence. Recording or questioning your child for court usually backfires.

The court can improve on what either parent offers. The judge gave the non-moving parent more weekends at home than the relocating parent had proposed, so the child could keep links with that side of the family.

Where to get support

Relocation cases are among the hardest in family law, and the outcome often turns on detail. If you are representing yourself, a McKenzie Friend can help you organise your evidence, understand the Cafcass report and prepare for the hearing. You can find independent McKenzie Friends in the Bridge The Gap directory at familycourtbridge.org.

This article is general information only and is not legal advice. Every case depends on its own facts.