I have been reading the first Court of Appeal decision on Child Focused Courts, because the point parents need is easy to miss under the new name.
The procedure has changed. The law has not.
On 29 September 2026 the Court of Appeal handed down Re C (Child Arrangements Orders; Domestic Abuse; Child Focused Court) [2026] EWCA Civ 1216. Sir Stephen Cobb, President of the Family Division, sat with Lord Justice Moylan and Lord Justice Zacaroli. The President said this was the first appeal to reach that court from a Family Court using the Child Focused Court model.
Has Child Focused Courts changed the law? No. The Court’s own press summary says the model has changed procedure and culture, but has not changed the substantive law. The welfare of the child remains paramount, and Practice Direction 12J continues to apply in full.
This is general information, not legal advice. It is about England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland differ. Nothing here can tell you what a court will do in your family, or how long a case will take.
The judgment on the National Archives is the authoritative text. The Court’s press summary is there to help people understand the decision. The summary itself says it does not form part of the reasons, and that the full judgment is the only authoritative document. I read both on 10 October 2026.
What the Court said has changed, and what has not
The press summary puts the wider point in the Court’s own words: “The introduction of the Child Focused Court model has changed procedure and culture, but has not changed the substantive law. The welfare of the child remains paramount and Practice Direction 12J continues to apply in full.”
The judgment says the same thing in its own terms. At paragraph 44, the President describes a significant change in procedure and culture. The model is intentionally less adversarial, more investigative, and more closely focused on the lived experience of children and victim-survivors of domestic abuse. It seeks a fuller understanding of the child’s circumstances through the Child Impact Report. The timing of that report, before the first hearing, is set out in the rollout announcements linked below, not in that paragraph.
At paragraph 45, he says the introduction of the model has not altered the substantive legal framework. The welfare of the child remains paramount. Section 1(1) of the Children Act 1989, which I read on 10 October 2026, says that when a court decides a question about a child’s upbringing, the child’s welfare shall be the court’s paramount consideration. Practice Direction 12J remains fully applicable. The obligations on the Family Court where domestic abuse is alleged or established are unchanged. Earlier Court of Appeal decisions on domestic abuse, including Re H-N and Re K, remain relevant under the new model.
Practice Direction 12J is the Family Court’s practice direction on child arrangements where domestic abuse and harm are raised. Its purpose, as published on Justice.uk and read on 10 October 2026, is to set out what the court is required to do where domestic abuse is alleged or admitted, or where there is other reason to believe a child or a party has experienced it, or is at risk of it.
At paragraph 18, the President says the Child Focused Court model does not in any respect undercut or dilute that Practice Direction. Judges and magistrates must continue to apply it with the same care and rigour as before.
There is one limit on the phrase “in full”, and it comes from the judgment rather than from me. At paragraph 16, the President says Practice Direction 12J is built into the new process, and that the pilot rules make some procedural amendments so it lines up with Child Focused Court hearings, including how a Child Impact Report is used if facts are in dispute. Those are amendments about how the process runs. They are not a softer version of the domestic abuse rules. I am not going to walk through those hearing stages here. Current official guidance is the place for procedure, and a general article cannot map them onto one family.
What this appeal decided, and what it did not
The press summary is careful about the result, and so am I. This was an appeal about one family’s case, heard from the Family Court at Wrexham. The Court dismissed the appeal against the contact arrangements and the other welfare decisions. It allowed the appeal only on an order under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 that had restricted the mother from making a further application without the court’s permission. The press summary says that order continues against the father only.
I am not setting out the family’s arrangements, the allegations, or the hours of time the judge ordered. Those facts belong in the judgment. They are not a template. A decision that limited, supervised time was open to the judge on those facts is not a promise, or a warning, about what another court will order.
The wider guidance is the part that travels. The press summary says not every allegation of domestic abuse requires a separate fact-finding hearing. The question remains whether findings are necessary to assess risk and to decide the child’s welfare. A more investigative process does not reduce the need for a fair hearing. That is a statement of the Court’s approach. It is not a set of steps for asking a court to list, or not to list, a hearing.
Where the rollout stood when the Court decided
Child Focused Courts, the renamed Pathfinder model, are a change to how some private-law children cases are handled in England and Wales. They are not a new name for a child arrangements order.
GOV.UK’s announcement of 17 March 2026, which I re-read on 10 October 2026, still says the courts operate in 10 of 43 areas: all of Wales, Birmingham and the West Midlands, Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, and West Yorkshire. It names eight further areas for the first stage of the national expansion, and says the model will then expand across the rest of England and Wales over the upcoming financial years. It does not say those eight areas are already live.
In the 29 September judgment, at paragraph 11, the Court described the model as currently operating in ten court centres, including the whole of Wales, and envisaged that by early 2029 it would apply in all private law cases across the jurisdiction. I have not seen a later official list, read on 10 October 2026, that moves the “currently live” number past ten. If you need to know whether a particular court is using the model, check the current official information. Do not treat this article as a local timetable.
Our Child Focused Courts explainer sets out the March announcement, the Child Impact Report and the pilot figures, and it now includes this appeal. Our guide to how long a child arrangements order takes keeps published timings in their place: they describe groups of cases, not one family.
What I would not take from the headline
I would not take this as news that the court now starts from a different law. It does not.
I would not take a faster or more child-focused process as a promise about how long a case will take, or about whether time with a parent will be ordered. The Court said the appeal was not about the merits of the model. It was about whether the principles were applied properly in that case.
I would not treat a shared parenting app, or any record you keep, as a substitute for Practice Direction 12J or for advice about your own circumstances. A factual note of what was agreed, what was suggested and what happened can make the practical arrangements easier to follow. A court decides what use, if any, to make of a record. Our guide to what records to keep stays on that side of the line.
If you need advice about your own circumstances, a solicitor, or a service such as Citizens Advice or Advicenow, can help you find the right next step. If there is fear, coercion or domestic abuse, do not treat a general article as the support you need. In an emergency, call 999. The National Domestic Abuse Helpline is 0808 2000 247.