Melissa Elsworth represented the child through their Guardian in this case, before The Honourable Ms Justice Henke. She was led by Francesca Wiley KC in relation to the fact-finding hearing and by Janet Bazley KC in relation to the applications concerning the deceased child’s former therapist. The child’s solicitor is Lisa Ursell of Wannops Solicitors.

The first reported judgment, Re E (A Child) (Complex Fact-Finding: Allegations of Domestic Abuse and Alienating Behaviours) [2025] EWFC 422 follows a very lengthy fact-finding hearing in private law proceedings. The fact-finding hearing, which lasted around a month, is believed to be one of the longest ever private law fact-finding hearings. 

The President described this case as being ‘of the utmost complexity’. It involved a plethora of allegations, including alleged sexual abuse of the Mother and an older child by the Father, cross-allegations of domestic abuse, and allegations by the Father of severe alienating behaviours by the Mother. The tragic context of this case was that one of the older children had died during the course of proceedings. 

The Honourable Ms Justice Henke made findings that the children had been subjected to severe alienating behaviours by their Mother and the Father had been subjected to significant emotional abuse by the Mother. The Court did not find that the Father had acted abusively towards the Mother or any of the children. The Court also made findings against the deceased child’s former therapist, due to significant failings and deficiencies on her part.

In addition to the above, the Court found that the manner in which an out of hours hearing was held (listed in order to consider the Mother’s application for an injunction to prevent the Father from attending or holding any funeral for the deceased child) infringed the Father’s Article 6 rights, with the Father being notified of the hearing significantly later than the press and with ‘little time to read the papers and self-represented’. The Court also found as follows: ‘In the circumstances, the only reasonable finding I can make on the balance of probabilities is that the father was served late to gain some litigation advantage. The late service meant that he received copies of D’s suicide notes 9 minutes before the hearing began. The late service in my judgment infringed the father’s Article 6 rights. The late hearing, which took two hours, effectively deprived the father of any right of appeal.’

In the linked judgment of Re E (A Child) (Disclosure to Regulator & Naming of a Witness in a Judgment) [2025] EWFC 423 The Honourable Ms Justice Henke determined (in line with the positions of the Guardian and the Father) that the deceased child’s former therapist should be named in the published fact-finding judgment, as well as that the judgment should be sent to her regulator (the BACP), the LADO, and the schools for which she worked. 

The therapist’s application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal (which was refused) is now reported at Re E (A Child) [2025] EWCA Civ 1563, in which Janet Bazley KC and Melissa Elsworth also appeared.