In a notable outcome for family law, Eleanor Bruce, a barrister at Coram Chambers, successfully challenged a case management decision regarding a complex domestic abuse case. This significant ruling has now been published, shedding light on the crucial welfare considerations surrounding the well-being of the children involved.
The case, GM v VB [2025] EWFC 857, was presided over by Mrs Justice Judd and involved an appeal against the decisions made by His Honour Judge Tolson KC concerning the father’s application for contact with his children. The mother had raised serious allegations of domestic abuse, including physical violence and coercive control, culminating in emergency protocols that necessitated a thorough risk assessment before any contact could be arranged.
In the original hearing, Judge Tolson KC had prematurely discharged a planned fact-finding hearing and instructed that an Independent Social Worker (ISW) report be prepared instead. However, Mrs Justice Judd unequivocally disagreed with this approach, stating, “There is a significant gulf between the mother’s allegations and the father’s admissions, and in my judgement, the judge was wrong to decide that the already-listed fact-finding hearing was not necessary and should be vacated.”
The background reveals a tumultuous history between the parents, with three children caught amid their conflict. The father had pleaded guilty to serious offences that indicated a pattern of abuse, further complicating matters of parental contact. The mother’s position remained firm: before any form of direct contact could occur, an accurate professional risk assessment was essential.
In her judgment, Mrs Justice Judd emphasised the severe nature of the allegations made by the mother, which she asserted were not merely incidental but critical to understanding the risks that the father posed. She cited specific concerns, including physical violence and threats made in front of the children. The father’s admissions, meanwhile, were found to address the gravity of these allegations inadequately.
This ruling marks a pivotal moment in the case, reinforcing the necessity of thorough investigation and assessment in matters that profoundly affect children’s welfare. As Mrs Justice Judd remarked, “These are very different accounts which are relevant to the welfare outcome for the children as they affect the level of risk posed by the father.”
Eleanor Bruce’s pivotal role in this appeal has garnered attention within the legal community, with her representation drawing upon extensive experience in family law. Partnering with co-counsel Anita Mehta of 4PB and solicitor Lisa Lee from Clifton Ingram LLP, Bruce adeptly outlined the grave implications of neglecting essential risk assessments in such cases.
The ramifications of this judgment extend beyond the immediate case, sending a clear message about the court’s responsibility to ensure that the welfare of children remains paramount, particularly in circumstances fraught with allegations of domestic abuse. As the case is remitted for further proceedings, the need for a cautious and thorough approach remains evident.
Coram Chambers takes pride in Eleanor Bruce’s contribution to this landmark judgment, reinforcing the chambers’ commitment to upholding justice in complex family law cases. More updates on this significant legal development will follow as the case progresses.
In the meantime, you can read and download the judgement below or online here.
