Re C: What the First Child Focused Court Appeal Means for You

In September 2026, the Court of Appeal handed down its first decision on how the new Child Focused Court (CFC) model handles domestic abuse cases. This matters to you if you're navigating child arrangements proceedings and concerned about how abuse allegations are treated.

What is the Child Focused Court model?

The CFC is a relatively new way of running private law children's cases (disputes about child arrangements after separation). It's more investigative than the old adversarial approach. Instead of parents arriving at court with competing stories, the court gets professional information early on about the child and their family through a Child Impact Report prepared by Cafcass or the local authority. The idea is to make things faster, less traumatic, and genuinely focused on what's best for the child.

The shift was piloted from 2022 and rolled out nationally in 2026. Wales has been leading the way with the model since early on.

What was Re C about?

A mother with four children appealed against a child arrangements order made by the Wrexham Family Court under the CFC model. The father had a history of serious domestic abuse, including incidents he admitted. The mother alleged coercive and controlling behaviour.

The Family Court judge made a limited contact order (supervised). The mother appealed against both that order and a restriction preventing either parent from making further applications without the court's permission.

The Court of Appeal partially allowed the appeal on one point: the restriction on the mother applying to court. But it upheld the welfare decision about contact arrangements.

What did the Court of Appeal say matters?

Four key points for you:

1. The CFC model hasn't changed the substantive law. The welfare of the child is still paramount. Domestic abuse law hasn't changed. Practice Direction 12J (the rules for handling domestic abuse in child cases) still applies in full.

2. Not every allegation of domestic abuse needs a fact-finding hearing. The court can assess risk and make welfare decisions even without proving each incident on the balance of probabilities. But the court must still properly recognise and analyse domestic abuse.

3. The court must understand the pattern and impact of abuse, not just individual incidents. This matters because abusive behaviour often operates as a pattern of control rather than isolated events.

4. Being more investigative doesn't mean being less rigorous about domestic abuse. The CFC's inquisitorial approach doesn't reduce the court's duty to take abuse seriously.

Why was the mother's appeal partly allowed?

The Court of Appeal said it was wrong to treat the mother and father as equivalent when deciding whether to restrict applications. The father's abusive behaviour and breach of previous contact orders was a central fact. The mother's litigation conduct or any contribution to the proceedings couldn't be equated with the father's abuse. That distinction mattered.

What does this mean for you as a litigant in person?

If you're going through the CFC model and you've experienced or you're alleging abuse:

Your account of a pattern of abuse is relevant even if you don't have individual incidents formally proved. The court is trained to look at cumulative impact and coercive control.

You don't need a full fact-finding hearing to have abuse recognised and factored into the welfare decision. But domestic abuse still must be properly analysed. The court's investigative approach isn't a shortcut around that.

The court's approach must stay grounded in evidence. The new model's emphasis on investigation doesn't mean the rules of evidence disappear or that judges ignore procedural fairness.

If you have a history of abuse and the other party restricts your court access, that restriction won't be applied as if you and they are equivalent players.

Where can you get help?

If you're a victim-survivor of domestic abuse going through family court, the CFC model includes a funded pathway to specialist support. Cafcass or your local authority can refer you to an Independent Domestic Violence Adviser (IDVA) who can do a risk assessment and support you through the process.

A McKenzie Friend can help you prepare and present your case. Bridge The Gap's directory lists independent McKenzie Friends across the UK.

This judgment is the first appeal-level guidance on CFC and domestic abuse. It clarifies that the model's procedural changes don't sideline abuse, but it also reminds us that courts still need evidence and still have to follow the rules.

The full judgment is available from the judiciary website. The Court of Appeal's press summary is also there if you want the headlines without the legal detail.