Child Arrangements Orders: How the Family Court Decides, and What Child Focused Courts and the Courts and Tribunals Bill Change

Key Takeaways

• A child arrangements order decides where a child lives and the time they spend with each parent. It is made under section 8 of the Children Act 1989, and the court decides it on one test: the child's welfare, which section 1(1) makes the court's paramount consideration.
• The presumption of parental involvement is still the law today. Section 1(2A) of the Children Act 1989 requires the court to presume that each parent's involvement will further the child's welfare unless the contrary is shown, and "involvement" has never meant any particular division of the child's time.
• The Courts and Tribunals Bill would repeal that presumption, but it is a Bill and not yet law. Clause 17 would remove section 1(2A), (2B), (6) and (7); the Bill is at Commons report stage with a sitting listed for 13 October 2026, and the repeal would only take effect on a date set by regulations after Royal Assent.
• Most applicants must attend a MIAM, then file form C100 and pay a £270 court fee. The £270 figure is in the HMCTS EX50 fees list updated on 13 July 2026, Help with Fees can reduce it, and the MIAM requirement only falls away where an exemption such as domestic abuse or genuine urgency applies.
• Outside Child Focused Court areas, the first hearing is normally held five to six weeks after the application is issued. Before it, Cafcass carries out police and local authority checks and files a safeguarding letter; in Child Focused Courts a Child Impact Report is ordinarily filed within eight weeks instead, and private law children cases took an average of 33 weeks to conclude in April to June 2026.
• Child Focused Courts change the procedure, not the law. The Court of Appeal held in Re C [2026] EWCA Civ 1216 on 29 September 2026 that the welfare principle and Practice Direction 12J on domestic abuse apply in full, and that a fact-finding hearing is needed only where findings are necessary to assess risk and decide the child's arrangements.
• Child Focused Courts currently run in all of Wales and parts of England only. As at 8 October 2026 they operate in Dorset, Birmingham, West Yorkshire, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, and courts around Wolverhampton, Stoke and Worcester; eight further English areas are named next, with full coverage expected by early 2029.
• A section 91(14) order stops a named person applying again without the court's permission, and it must be justified against that person. In Re C the Court of Appeal set aside the order made against the mother because the judge had not analysed whether her conduct warranted it, while the order against the father remained.
• For Christmas arrangements, the realistic time to involve the court is October, not December. A first hearing is normally listed five to six weeks after issue, a Child Focused Court's Child Impact Report ordinarily takes up to eight weeks, and orders without notice to the other parent are reserved for exceptional cases such as risk of harm, not a disagreement about the holidays.
• WPC Lawyers advises parents applying for, or responding to, a child arrangements order. Our child arrangements order solicitors act in standard and Child Focused Court cases, including those involving domestic abuse, and our fixed fees are published on our website.

Introduction

When separated parents cannot agree where their child should live or how much time the child should spend with each of them, the Family Court can decide for them by making a child arrangements order. This guide explains what that order is, how you apply for one, the legal test the court applies, and what happens at each stage of the court process in England and Wales.

Three developments make this the right moment to set the position out carefully. On 29 September 2026 the Court of Appeal gave its first ruling on the Child Focused Court model, the new investigative procedure that is being rolled out across England and Wales. The Courts and Tribunals Bill, which would repeal the presumption that a parent's involvement benefits the child, is due back in the House of Commons on 13 October 2026. And from October onwards, many parents start to worry about who the children will be with at Christmas.

We keep two things separate throughout. Confirmed law is what a court applies to your case today: the Children Act 1989 as currently in force, the Family Procedure Rules and their practice directions, and the judgments of the higher courts. Proposals are measures that may change the law but have not done so yet. The repeal of the presumption of parental involvement sits in the second category, and we flag it every time it appears.

This article covers England and Wales only. Scotland and Northern Ireland have separate systems. Arrangements for children are decided separately from money on separation; if you are also dealing with finances on divorce, our guide to divorce financial settlements covers that.

What Is a Child Arrangements Order?

A child arrangements order is defined in section 8(1) of the Children Act 1989 as an order regulating arrangements about "with whom a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact" and when. In practice an order usually contains two kinds of provision. A "lives with" provision says where the child will live, and it can name one parent or both. A "spends time with" provision sets out time with the other parent, which can be direct (visits, overnight stays, holidays) or indirect (calls, video calls, letters and cards).

Child arrangements orders replaced the old residence and contact orders on 22 April 2014, which is why older paperwork, and many people, still talk about "custody" and "contact".

Section 8 also provides two related orders. The court often deals with them in the same set of proceedings.

A parent can apply for any of these orders without first asking the court's permission. Some other people, such as grandparents, may need permission before they can apply, and form C100 has a section for that request.

Before You Apply: the MIAM and Form C100

Before you can apply, the law usually requires you to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting, known as a MIAM, with an authorised family mediator. Rule 3.6 of Part 3 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 applies this requirement to private law applications about children, and rule 3.8 lists the exemptions, including evidence of domestic abuse, child protection enquiries and genuine urgency. At the meeting the mediator explains mediation and the other ways of settling the dispute without a court, and screens for domestic abuse and risk to the child. GOV.UK says you can usually get a voucher worth up to £500 towards mediation, whatever you earn. Our family mediation support page explains how we help at this stage. The exemptions themselves deserve a guide of their own, and we will publish one.

The application is made on form C100, preferably online through the HMCTS service linked from the GOV.UK C100 page. If you are alleging domestic abuse or other harm, you also complete form C1A, which gives the court and Cafcass the detail they need for their safeguarding work. The other parent receives the application, a notice of hearing and form C7, the acknowledgment form they use to respond.

The court fee for a new application under the Children Act 1989 is £270. That figure appears in the HMCTS Family Court fees (EX50) list, which was last updated on 13 July 2026. Only one fee is payable if you apply for more than one order in the same application. If you receive certain benefits or are on a low income, you may qualify for Help with Fees. Our own charges for advising on and running an application are set out on our published fees page.

How the Family Court Decides

The paramountcy principle and the welfare checklist

Section 1 of the Children Act 1989 governs every decision. Section 1(1) makes the child's welfare the court's paramount consideration. That means the court is not deciding which parent is right, which parent has been treated unfairly, or what either parent is entitled to. It is deciding what is best for the child.

Where a child arrangements order is opposed, section 1(3) requires the court to have regard in particular to a list of factors known as the welfare checklist. Section 1(4)(a) applies the checklist whenever the court is considering whether to make, vary or discharge a section 8 order and a party opposes it.

The presumption of parental involvement: still the law today

Since 22 October 2014, section 1(2A) of the Children Act 1989 has required the court, when it considers a contested section 8 order, to presume that the involvement of each parent in the child's life will further the child's welfare, unless the contrary is shown. The presumption is narrower than many parents assume.

First, section 1(2B) defines "involvement" as involvement of some kind, direct or indirect, "but not any particular division of a child's time". The presumption has never meant equal time, and it has never meant overnight stays. Secondly, under section 1(6) it applies only to a parent who can be involved in the child's life without putting the child at risk of harm. A parent is treated as meeting that condition unless there is some evidence before the court that their involvement would put the child at risk whatever form it took. Thirdly, it is a starting point, not a trump card: the child's welfare under section 1(1) still decides the case.

As of 8 October 2026, the presumption remains in force and the court must apply it.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill: a proposal to repeal the presumption

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is a government Bill sponsored by the Ministry of Justice. Its long title includes amending section 1 of the Children Act 1989 "to remove the presumption relating to the involvement of parents in the life of a child". In the version of the Bill reintroduced on 14 May 2026, clause 17 would omit section 1(2A), (2B), (6) and (7), and the section of the Children and Families Act 2014 that inserted them. When the Ministry of Justice announced the national rollout of Child Focused Courts on 17 March 2026, it said the repeal means courts "will no longer start from an assumption" that parental involvement is always in a child's best interest.

The Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 25 February 2026, had its second reading on 10 March 2026 and was considered in Public Bill Committee between 25 March and 28 April 2026. It was carried over into the new parliamentary session and reintroduced on 14 May 2026, and its report stage sitting is listed for 13 October 2026. Third reading, every House of Lords stage and Royal Assent are still to come.

Two points matter for anyone whose case is live now. The Bill could still be amended before it becomes law, and clause numbers may change. And even after Royal Assent, the commencement clause in the reintroduced Bill brings this repeal into force only through regulations made by the Lord Chancellor, so there will be a further gap before courts stop applying the presumption. Clause 17 leaves the paramountcy principle in section 1(1) and the welfare checklist in section 1(3) untouched.

"No order" and the cost of delay

Two further principles in section 1 shape every case. Section 1(5) says the court should not make an order at all unless doing so would be better for the child than making no order. Where parents have reached a workable agreement, the court may decide that no order is needed, although many parents ask for their agreement to be recorded in a consent order so that it can be enforced. Section 1(2) requires the court to treat delay as likely to prejudice the child's welfare, which is why judges control the number of hearings and the scope of evidence.

The Court Process, Stage by Stage

Outside the Child Focused Court areas, which now include the whole of Wales, applications follow the Child Arrangements Programme in Practice Direction 12B. The table sets out the usual sequence. Not every case passes through every stage, and many settle at the first hearing.

Cafcass safeguarding checks

Before the first hearing, Cafcass identifies any safety issues. Under paragraph 13 of Practice Direction 12B, this work is confined to safety: the officer does not discuss the merits of the dispute with either parent and does not contact the child before the hearing. Cafcass explains on its page about the safeguarding letter that the letter records the current arrangements, the results of the police and local authority checks and what each parent said, and ends with advice on next steps.

The first hearing (FHDRA)

The First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment is listed ordinarily in the fifth week after issue and in the sixth week at the latest, with at least 14 days' notice to the other parent where practicable. A Cafcass officer attends. The court will try to establish what can be agreed, decide whether a report or a fact-finding hearing is needed, and consider whether any interim arrangement can safely be put in place. Practice Direction 12J says the court must not generally make an interim child arrangements order without safeguarding information, unless it is to protect the child.

Section 7 reports

If the case does not settle, the court can order a welfare report under section 7 of the Children Act 1989. The Cafcass officer usually speaks to the child, often alone and sometimes at school, meets each parent, and may contact teachers or health professionals. The court is not bound by the recommendation, but it must give reasons if it departs from it.

A report has to be built on facts the court has found or the parties have agreed. In Re D (Change of Circumstances: Domestic Abuse Allegations) [2026] EWCA Civ 969, handed down on 30 July 2026, the Court of Appeal set aside an order that had adopted a section 7 recommendation resting substantially on the assumption that disputed abuse allegations were true, when no findings had been made. Baker LJ observed that, where a report treats untested allegations as material to its recommendation, this should be expressly drawn to the court's attention and the need for a fact-finding hearing reviewed.

Fact-finding hearings where domestic abuse is alleged

Practice Direction 12J governs every child arrangements case in which domestic abuse is raised. It requires the court to identify, at the earliest opportunity, whether domestic abuse is an issue that is likely to be relevant, and then to decide whether a fact-finding hearing is necessary. "Necessary" is the key word. The leading case, Re H-N and Others (Children) (Domestic Abuse: Finding of Fact Hearings) [2021] EWCA Civ 448, confirmed that not every case needs one, even where the allegations are very serious (paragraphs 8 and 139), and that a pattern of coercive or controlling behaviour can be as abusive as, or more abusive than, any single incident (paragraph 31).

Where abuse is admitted or proved, the court must apply the welfare checklist in the light of it, and may order contact only where the physical and emotional safety of the child and the parent the child lives with can, so far as possible, be secured before, during and after contact. If the court orders contact with a parent found to have been abusive, it must explain why that will not expose the child to a risk of harm.

The final hearing and how long it takes

At the final hearing the court hears from the parents and any other witnesses, including the Cafcass officer if needed, and then decides. The judge controls the length and scope of the evidence. A party has a right to a fair opportunity to present their case, but not to unlimited time.

On timing, the Ministry of Justice's Family Court Statistics Quarterly for April to June 2026, published on 24 September 2026, records that private law children cases took an average of 33 weeks to be disposed of, down 3 weeks on a year earlier, and that 52% concluded within 26 weeks. GOV.UK tells parents it "usually takes around 10 months" to get a court order. Your own case may be quicker if it settles early, or slower if a fact-finding hearing or expert evidence is needed.

Child Focused Courts: What Changes

The Child Focused Court model began as a pilot called Pathfinder on 21 February 2022, in Dorset and North Wales, and was renamed in early 2026. It is set out in Practice Direction 36Z and a pilot version of Practice Direction 12B. The aim, in the practice direction's words, is a "more investigative approach" with a particular focus on survivors of domestic abuse, including children, and on litigants in person.

The main differences from the standard programme are these.

The Child Impact Report is prepared by a Family Court Adviser from Cafcass or Cafcass Cymru, or by a local authority social worker where the family has had recent contact with children's services. It draws together safeguarding information, risk information and the views of the parents and, where appropriate, the child, so that the judge or magistrates have a rounded picture of the child's life at the first decision point.

Where Child Focused Courts operate today

The model applies where the application is started at one of the court locations listed in Practice Direction 36Z. When we checked the practice direction on 8 October 2026, these were the participating locations.

The pilot currently covers applications filed up to 31 March 2027, an end date set by practice direction updates made in 2026.

On 17 March 2026 the Ministry of Justice announced the national rollout. It named the next areas as Northumbria and North Durham, Cleveland and South Durham, Lancashire, Cumbria, York and North Yorkshire, Cheshire and Merseyside, Northamptonshire, and Coventry and Warwickshire, with the rest of England and Wales to follow over later financial years. The government says the pilot areas saw backlogs halve and cases resolved up to seven and a half months faster. The Court of Appeal noted in Re C that the model is expected to apply to all private law cases across England and Wales by early 2029. Those next areas did not yet appear in Practice Direction 36Z when we checked, so if you live in one of them, ask the court which procedure your case will follow.

What the Court of Appeal Decided in Re C

Re C (Child Arrangements Orders; Domestic Abuse; Child Focused Court) [2026] EWCA Civ 1216 was decided by Sir Stephen Cobb, President of the Family Division, with Moylan LJ and Zacaroli LJ agreeing. It is the first appeal to reach the Court of Appeal from a case run under the Child Focused Court model, and the President used it to set out general principles before turning to the facts.

The case concerned four siblings. Their father had admitted a range of domestic abuse in earlier proceedings, after which a 2024 order provided for supervised contact. In April 2026 the Family Court at Wrexham made final orders that the children live with their mother and see their father for five hours a fortnight in term time, supervised by named family friends, with no telephone contact. The judge refused the mother's applications to restrict the father's parental responsibility and for a non-molestation order, accepting detailed undertakings from the father instead, and made a one-year section 91(14) order against both parents. The mother appealed. The appeal was heard on 30 July 2026, and judgment was handed down on 29 September 2026.

The model changes procedure, not the substantive law

The court held that the Child Focused Court model "has brought about a significant change in procedure and culture" but "has not altered the substantive legal framework" (paragraphs 44 and 45). The child's welfare remains paramount, and the earlier authorities on domestic abuse, including Re H-N, apply just as they do in any other private law case.

Practice Direction 12J applies in full

The President said the model "does not in any respect undercut or dilute" Practice Direction 12J, and that judges and magistrates must apply it "with the same care and rigour as at present" (paragraph 18). A less adversarial process does not reduce the need for procedural fairness. If anything, it requires the judge to be clearer about the issues and the purpose of any enquiry (paragraph 47).

A fact-finding hearing is not needed for every allegation

The touchstone remains necessity. The court should ask what the case is really about, what is agreed, what is disputed, and which disputed issues must be decided before a welfare decision can be made. The President gave an example: where parents dispute the amount of contact rather than whether there should be contact at all, fact-finding about past abuse is less likely to be necessary (paragraph 46). On the facts, no fact-finding hearing was needed because the father had accepted the incidents the mother relied on, and the judge could manage the risk through supervision and conditions (paragraphs 105 to 111). Agreements reached in the process must be genuine and informed (paragraph 48).

Children's wishes must be read in the light of the abuse

All four children wanted to see their father. The court accepted that their wishes were summarised accurately, but said they could not be considered in isolation from the family history, because abuse is liable to shape what children say (paragraphs 122 to 124). The court also criticised the Child Impact Report, prepared by a Cafcass Cymru officer, for not addressing the harm the children would suffer if the relationship with their father ended (paragraph 124) and for not working through the welfare checklist (paragraph 126). The appeal against the contact arrangements was dismissed.

The section 91(14) order against the mother was set aside

This was the one ground on which the mother succeeded. The judge had made the order against both parents on the basis that a period of respite from litigation was needed. The Court of Appeal held that he had not analysed whether the mother's conduct fell within any of the circumstances that justify such an order, and that it was wrong to equate her litigation conduct with the father's (paragraph 133). The order now applies to the father only.

Section 91(14) and Section 91A Orders Explained

Section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 allows the court, when it disposes of an application, to order that a named person may not make a further application of a specified kind about the child without the court's permission. It is often called a "barring order", but that is misleading. It does not shut the person out of the court for good. It adds a filter: they must first ask the court for permission.

Since 19 May 2022, section 91A, inserted by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, has added three points. An order may be made where a further application would put the child, or another individual such as the other parent, at risk of harm (section 91A(2)). When a person subject to an order asks for permission to apply, the court must consider whether there has been a material change of circumstances since the order was made (section 91A(4)). And the court may make an order on an application or of its own motion (section 91A(5)).

The practice direction guidance quoted in Re C adds other recognised circumstances: repeated and unreasonable applications, a needed period of respite after litigation, or conduct such as harassment that harms the child directly or through its effect on the parent caring for them. In cases where domestic abuse is alleged or proven, the practice directions say the court should consider from an early stage whether an order is appropriate, even if nobody has asked for one. Re C is a reminder that each person named in the order must fall within those circumstances on their own conduct.

Christmas and School Holiday Arrangements

Searches about Christmas arrangements rise every autumn, and the timetable explains why the date you start matters. Outside Child Focused Court areas, Practice Direction 12B lists the first hearing normally in the fifth or sixth week after the application is issued, and that clock starts only once the court has issued the application, which itself comes after the MIAM. An application issued in mid-November is therefore likely to reach a first hearing around mid to late December at best. An application made in December will rarely be heard before 25 December. In a Child Focused Court area the first decision point usually follows the Child Impact Report, which is ordinarily filed within eight weeks of the application, so the same advice to start early applies with more force.

Even a first hearing in time is not a guarantee of a Christmas order. The court will not generally make an interim order without Cafcass's safeguarding information. Where the issue is narrow, such as which parent has the children on Christmas Day and which on Boxing Day, parents often reach agreement at the first hearing with the help of the court and Cafcass, and the court can record it.

Urgent and without-notice applications are reserved for genuine risk. Practice Direction 12B says orders made without notice to the other parent should be exceptional, for example where there was literally no time to give notice, or where giving notice would expose the applicant or child to a risk of harm. The MIAM rules allow an urgent application where there is a risk to someone's life, liberty or physical safety, a risk of harm to the child, or a risk of a child being unlawfully removed from the UK or unlawfully kept outside England and Wales. If you fear a child will be taken abroad over the holidays without your agreement, that is the territory of a prohibited steps order. A disagreement about how the holiday is shared is not, on its own, an emergency.

If there is already a court order that covers Christmas, it must be followed. Changing it needs the other parent's agreement, recorded properly, or a fresh application to vary it.

Where Domestic Abuse Is Part of the Picture

If you have experienced domestic abuse, or your children have, the court process is designed to take it into account from the start. You can say so on form C1A. A MIAM exemption may apply, you can ask the court for measures to help you take part safely, and Practice Direction 12J requires the court to consider the rules that prohibit cross-examination in person in domestic abuse cases. In Child Focused Court areas, a referral to an Independent Domestic Violence Adviser can be made.

The legal route and practical support work alongside each other. The National Domestic Abuse Helpline is free and confidential, and you can call it on 0808 2000 247 or visit the National Domestic Abuse Helpline website. If you are in immediate danger, call 999. Separate protective orders, such as non-molestation orders, exist to stop someone harassing or threatening you; our page on non-molestation orders explains what they do.

If you are the parent against whom allegations are made, the same framework applies to you. You will be given the opportunity to respond, the court decides disputed allegations only where it is necessary to do so, and admissions you make will be taken into account.

How Can WPC Lawyers Help?

WPC Lawyers, authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA ID 8003128), advises parents in England and Wales on applying for, responding to and varying child arrangements orders, in both standard and Child Focused Court cases.

We can advise you on whether an application is the right step, help you prepare the C100 and C1A or your response to them, and represent you at the first hearing, the Decision Hearing, any fact-finding hearing and the final hearing. Where the case involves allegations of domestic abuse or a request for a section 91(14) order, we can explain how Practice Direction 12J and Re C apply to your circumstances. See our child arrangements order service, and our family law services more widely.

Conclusion

A child arrangements order is decided on the child's welfare and nothing else. The welfare checklist, the rule against unnecessary orders and the principle that delay harms children apply in every case. The presumption that each parent's involvement benefits the child is still part of that framework today, even though the Courts and Tribunals Bill would remove it.

The procedure is changing faster than the law. Child Focused Courts already run across Wales and in several parts of England, and in Re C the Court of Appeal confirmed that the new investigative approach leaves the substantive law, including Practice Direction 12J, untouched. If you are thinking about applying, start early, keep the focus on your child, and take advice on how the rules apply to your family before the first hearing.

Glossary