Technical Matter Guide
Law and procedure checked 22 September 2026Child Arrangements Orders: what the court is actually deciding
A Child Arrangements Order is a section 8 Children Act 1989 order regulating with whom a child is to live, spend time or otherwise have contact, and when those arrangements are to take place. The legal question is not what arrangement is fairest to the adults: it is what arrangement best serves the individual child's welfare. [1]
The legal framework
What is a Child Arrangements Order?
Section 8 of the Children Act 1989 defines a Child Arrangements Order as an order regulating arrangements concerning:
- with whom a child is to live;
- with whom a child is to spend time;
- with whom a child is otherwise to have contact; and
- when those arrangements are to take place.
Modern orders therefore use the language of “lives with”, “spends time with” and other contact rather than the old labels of “custody”, “residence” and “access”. [1]
The welfare framework
“Lives with” does not automatically mean 50/50
A Child Arrangements Order may regulate a child's living arrangements with more than one person. The label attached to an arrangement is not a mathematical formula for equal time. The court is concerned with the practical reality of the child's care and welfare.
In MK v CK [2011] EWCA Civ 793, the Court of Appeal stressed in the shared-care context that the practical arrangements for the child's care mattered more than the label attached to them. [case]
Procedure and where this matter appears in the chronology
Before proceedings
The court expects parties to consider non-court dispute resolution where it is safe and appropriate. In many cases an applicant must attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting, or rely on a valid exemption, before issuing a C100 application. Domestic abuse, child-protection concerns and urgency are among circumstances that may be relevant to an exemption. [5]
An application for a Child Arrangements Order is ordinarily made using Form C100. Where allegations of domestic abuse or harm are relevant, the safeguarding information provided to the court becomes particularly important. [6]
There are now two important procedural routes
Standard Child Arrangements Programme
In areas operating under PD12B, the usual route can include:
- application and gatekeeping;
- Cafcass safeguarding enquiries;
- First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment (FHDRA);
- case-management directions;
- fact-finding where necessary;
- section 7 welfare reporting where directed;
- Dispute Resolution Appointment; and
- a final welfare hearing where agreement is not reached.
The actual route depends on the issues in the case. [2]
Child Focused Model / PD36Z pilot
In the court locations currently covered by PD36Z, the standard PD12B procedure is modified. The model is more investigative and front-loaded and can involve:
- early safeguarding gatekeeping;
- information gathering and assessment;
- a Child Impact Report;
- earlier engagement with the child's voice;
- targeted fact-finding where required; and
- a Decision Hearing rather than simply reproducing the traditional CAP sequence.
Check PD36Z for the current participating court locations. [3]
Related procedural Matters
Evidence and welfare analysis
A child arrangements case becomes much clearer when the evidence is organised around the questions the court actually has to decide rather than around every dispute that has occurred between the adults.
The welfare checklist as an evidence map
| Welfare factor | What it may require the court to understand |
|---|---|
| Wishes and feelings | The child's ascertainable wishes and feelings, considered in light of age and understanding. This does not mean asking the child to choose between parents. |
| Physical, emotional and educational needs | Schooling, health, SEND, stability, emotional security, routines, relationships and day-to-day care. |
| Effect of change | The impact of changing home, school, care pattern, contact frequency, travel, household or established relationships. |
| Age, background and characteristics | The child's individual circumstances rather than assumptions about children generally. |
| Harm | Harm already suffered and risk of future physical, emotional or psychological harm. |
| Parenting capacity | Each relevant adult's ability to meet the child's needs, including practical and emotional needs. |
| Range of powers | Whether a different, narrower or protective order could meet the child's needs more proportionately. |
Evidence that is often more useful than volume
- the current and previous relevant court orders;
- a concise chronology of material events;
- school, health or professional evidence where genuinely relevant;
- evidence of the child's established care pattern and routine;
- practical evidence about travel, school journeys and handovers;
- clearly contextualised communications where they prove a material welfare issue;
- evidence supporting or responding to allegations of harm;
- a specific and workable proposal for future arrangements.
2026 Court of Appeal: D (Change of Circumstances: Domestic Abuse Allegations)
D [2026] EWCA Civ 969 is particularly important for child arrangements cases involving a proposed change of the child's home or settled routine.
The Court of Appeal criticised a welfare analysis that failed adequately to address the effect of the proposed change in the child's circumstances, including leaving the family home and current school.
The case is also a strong reminder that the statutory welfare checklist is not a ceremonial list. The evidence and judgment must actually engage with the material factors that matter in the individual child's case.
Safeguarding, domestic abuse and Cafcass
Allegations are not findings — but allegations can require risk management
Where domestic abuse or other harm is raised, PD12J requires the court to consider the issue throughout the proceedings and to determine what factual and welfare issues need to be resolved. A separate fact-finding hearing is not automatic: the court asks whether findings are necessary and proportionate to the welfare decision it must make. [7]
Patterns can matter more than isolated incidents
In Re H-N and Others (Children) [2021] EWCA Civ 448, the Court of Appeal emphasised that coercive and controlling behaviour may require the court to understand an overall pattern rather than treating every allegation as an isolated event. Equally, fact-finding should remain focused on what is necessary to assess future welfare and risk. [case]
Cafcass can assess risk. The court determines disputed facts.
In D [2026] EWCA Civ 969, the Court of Appeal addressed a section 7 report in which disputed domestic-abuse allegations had effectively influenced the recommendation as though they had occurred.
Cafcass observations and risk assessment may provide important evidence and professional analysis. But disputed allegations are not transformed into judicial findings simply because one account appears more compelling to a professional. Findings, where required, are for the court.
Where abuse is established
PD12J requires the court to consider the effect of domestic abuse on the child, the parent with whom the child is living, the child's relationship with each parent, future risk, and the parents' capacity to understand the impact of the abuse. The court must explain how established abuse has influenced its child-arrangements decision. [7]
This means that “contact” is not an abstract principle detached from safety. The form, frequency, supervision, conditions or absence of direct contact must be assessed through the individual child's welfare and risk.
Repeated applications and section 91(14)
Where future applications themselves may cause harm, harassment, oppressive behaviour or form part of continuing coercive control, the court can consider a section 91(14) order. PD12Q describes this as a protective filter rather than an absolute bar on future applications. [8]
What the order can regulate — and why the wording matters
A workable order may need to address more than alternate weekends
Depending on the dispute and what is proportionate, arrangements may need to deal with:
- where the child lives during term time;
- weekday and weekend arrangements;
- school holidays and half terms;
- Christmas, birthdays and other significant occasions;
- collection and return arrangements;
- direct and indirect contact;
- supervision or other safeguards where required;
- travel and practical arrangements;
- any staged or transitional arrangement.
But greater detail is not automatically better. The no-order principle and proportionality remain relevant. An order should solve the welfare problem the court actually needs to solve rather than attempt to regulate every future parental disagreement.
A “lives with” provision can have legal consequences beyond the timetable
These consequences are one reason why the exact wording of a “lives with” order should not be treated as merely cosmetic. [9] [10]
If the arrangements later stop working
The procedural question is often whether the existing order needs to be varied because circumstances have changed, or enforced because the order remains appropriate but is not being followed. Sometimes the issues overlap.
© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.
© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.
© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.
