IAD and BNA (Children) (Appeal Against Child Arrangements Order), Re

Facts

The parents of IAD and BNA, two brothers of primary school age, had operated an informal shared care arrangement for around six years. BNA has considerable additional needs and attends regular medical appointments; IAD is a keen sportsman. The arrangement was marked by entrenched conflict. The mother began proceedings on 22 May 2025 seeking a specific issue order about a proposed overseas summer holiday, the father having held the children's passports; a district judge permitted the holiday but directed that the proceedings continue to determine future holiday arrangements. A Cafcass section 7 report dated 10 November 2025 recommended appointment of a rule 16.4 guardian, and Lisa Jones was appointed. A round table meeting failed to produce agreement, and in February 2026 the local authority was directed to report under section 37 of the Children Act 1989. That report, dated 8 April 2026, recommended the children live with the mother for most of the time. Ms Jones' final analysis of 18 June 2026 concluded that equal shared care was not in the children's welfare interests and proposed a 5/9 day division. Following a contested final hearing at which neither parent gave oral evidence, District Judge Gribble made a child arrangements order on 14 July 2026 in those terms. The father sought permission to appeal on seven grounds.