Child Arrangements Order

Gap #593

The assumption

If the other parent reports a new allegation at a different police station, a magistrate can immediately overrule the family court's contact order.

The reality

Reporting an allegation to the police, at any station, does not change a child arrangements order. The order stays in force until the family court varies or discharges it on an application under the Children Act 1989. When contact stops after a new allegation, it is usually because one of these separate steps has been taken. Bail conditions. Where someone is arrested, bail can carry conditions, and those can restrict contact with a child. In Nottinghamshire County Council v The Mother (Police Bail) [2024] EWHC 666 (Fam), which was a care case, police bail conditions prevented unsupervised contact with any child and left no room for the family court to allow it. Mrs Justice Lieven said it is not for the family court to dictate bail conditions to the police, but that the family judge was much better placed than the police to assess the risk to the child, and that she hoped the police would consider the role of the family court when setting bail conditions. The judgment records that an application to vary police bail conditions can be made to the magistrates' court. A Domestic Abuse Protection Order. The police can apply for a DAPO by complaint to a magistrates' court (section 28 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021). Practice Direction 36ZG notes that, under section 36(1), the requirements of a DAPO must so far as practicable avoid conflict with any other court order or injunction the person is subject to, as well as conflict with their religious beliefs and interference with their work or with their attendance at an educational establishment. An application to vary or discharge a DAPO goes to the court that made it. A new family court order. A parent can apply to the family court to vary the child arrangements order, or for a protective order such as a non-molestation order. The police do not pass a new allegation to the family court automatically. Under the Disclosure of Information between Family and Criminal Agencies and Jurisdictions: 2024 Protocol, which replaced the 2013 Protocol and the old Annex H order template, police material is requested using the protocol's own forms. In private law proceedings the request goes to the police on the Annex 1 form, accompanied by an order in the court's standard form at Annex 5. The protocol states that use of its annexed forms is mandatory, and Annex 2 is the guidance written for completing Annex 1 in private law proceedings. Requests are expected to be focused and proportionate rather than a blanket trawl, and the guidance contemplates a 20-day timescale for the police response. In practice the court usually directs this where a fact-finding hearing is contemplated; where no direction has been made, the litigant in person has to ask the court to make the order. The DAPO rules send information the other way: when a family court makes a DAPO, the court officer emails a copy to the police within one day (Practice Direction 36ZG, paragraph 20). This part of the law is in transition. DAPOs have run in pilot areas only since 27 November 2024. The pilot ends on 24 November 2026, and from 25 November 2026 DAPOs are due to be available across all court jurisdictions in England and Wales, with Practice Direction 36ZG amended rather than replaced. Check the current position before relying on this after that date. Each of these is changed in a different place, so it matters which one has actually been made. This is general information, not legal advice.

Gap #590

The assumption

If I move out of the family home, I lose my say in the children's lives, or an arrangement has to be formally agreed before I go.

The reality

Parental responsibility does not end because a parent moves out (see gaps 55 and 57). Without a child arrangements order, nothing automatically fixes where the children live or how time is shared once one parent leaves. Arrangements can be agreed informally, but an informal agreement is not binding (see gap 561). If the matter does reach court, the welfare checklist in section 1(3) of the Children Act 1989 includes the likely effect on the child of any change in circumstances. The pattern the children become used to, including time with each parent after the move, can form part of that picture. Money is separate. Child maintenance and any financial order are not decided by who moved out (see gap 519).

Gap #567

The assumption

"The Cafcass parenting plan is a court form I have to file."

The reality

Our Child's Plan is a voluntary online tool from Cafcass. It is not a court form. However, a Child Arrangements Order application on form C100 asks you to attach any previous parenting plans and briefly say why they broke down, so a plan you have made may be relevant to a court application.

Gap #426

The assumption

(Court orders) Every line in my order means the same thing: do it or else.

The reality

The exact wording matters. A term saying a parent is "expected" to do something has its ordinary meaning and allows some flexibility if relevant matters arise. A term saying a parent "must" or "shall" do something is mandatory, and not doing it is a breach. Read each line and notice which words the court used.

Re D (Change of Circumstances: Domestic Abuse Allegations) 2026

A second appeal concerning a child arrangements order for a young child, D. The Court of Appeal found the original judge's decision — that D should live with her mother — was fundamentally flawed because the judge had implicitly adopted findings of domestic abuse from a Cafcass officer's report without holding a fact-finding hearing, and because the Cafcass report itself failed to properly assess the impact of changing D's home and school. The order was set aside and the matter sent for a full rehearing.