High Court considers fairness of alienating behaviour findings in child arrangements appeal

The High Court has given reasons on a mother's appeal against "parental alienation" findings made at a fact-finding hearing, a ruling relevant to parents in disputed child arrangements cases.

Mr Justice Poole heard the appeal in the Family Division of the High Court on 18 March 2026. He announced his decision to the parties that day and gave written reasons in a judgment dated 31 March 2026. The judgment was published on condition that the anonymity of the children and their family is strictly preserved, so the parties appear as "A Mother" and "A Father", and the children by initials.

Background

A child arrangements order made in March 2023 provided for the children to live with both parents under a shared care arrangement. In March 2024 the mother stopped contact between the children and the father, following allegations she said the children had made. The children later gave evidence in interviews.

At a fact-finding hearing, a Recorder dismissed the mother's allegations of abuse against the father. He also found that she had fabricated them and was guilty of "parental alienation".

The question on appeal

The mother did not challenge the dismissal of her own allegations. She appealed the findings against her on three grounds: that the alienating behaviour findings were wrong, that the Recorder erred in assessing her credibility, and that his reasons were insufficient.

Her counsel argued procedural unfairness. As a preliminary matter, the Recorder had decided not to determine three of the father's allegations: that the mother was making the children adopt her narrative, that she was persistently restricting their relationship with him, and that she was behaving in psychologically manipulative ways. He said he would deal with why the allegations had come up, which "might feed into parental alienation". The mother argued that evidence and submissions were directed at the issues the Recorder had decided to determine. A finding of alienation against her was therefore incompatible with her right to a fair trial under article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

She also argued that, although the Recorder recognised and purported to adopt the three-stage approach in the Family Justice Council guidance of December 2024, he failed to apply it, or made findings the evidence could not support.

The legal context

The appeal was issued well out of time. On 5 February 2026 the judge extended time and gave permission to appeal. The judgment sets out the usual test: an appeal court should not interfere with a trial judge's findings of primary fact unless satisfied that he was plainly wrong.

It also refers to Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38, in which the President endorsed the guidance. In that case, the President said the focus of the court's investigation should be a child's unexplained reluctance, resistance or refusal to spend time with a parent. Where domestic abuse is alleged alongside a cross-allegation of alienating behaviour, the fact-finding should first determine the domestic abuse issues. It should then consider whether the child's refusal is an "appropriate justified reaction" to any abusive behaviour. Alienating behaviour is considered only at a later stage.

Sources

• A Mother (Appeal: Alienating Behaviours: Fair Procedure), Re [2026] EWHC 783 (Fam), High Court (Family Division), 31 March 2026: https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/fam/2026/783