Putting the focus back on the welfare of the children in judicial reasoning

We recently acted for a mother in a successful appeal before the Cayman Islands Court of Appeal in MM v FF, a case which underscores how decisions about children must be made, the limits of “parental alienation” findings, and the importance of a proper welfare analysis in children proceedings.

The case arose from a dispute between parents who, following their separation, had operated a shared care arrangement for their two daughters over a number of years. While the arrangement was marked by conflict, it remained intact, with the children continuing to spend alternate weeks with each parent. That position changed, however, following welfare investigations and subsequent proceedings in the Grand Court. At first instance, significantly the Grand Court ordered:

• Sole residence of the children to the father; and
• Suspension of the mother’s direct contact with the children.

The decision was grounded in findings that the mother had engaged in alienating behaviour which was said to be causing emotional harm to the children.

The mother represented by Hampson and Company appealed.

Our Approach

Acting for the mother, we focused on the core issue: whether the decision could stand in the absence of a proper welfare analysis.

In cases involving children, the law requires the court to look carefully at a number of factors: (i) what the children want, (ii) what they need, (iii) how any change might affect them, and (iv) where the real risks of harm lie. These are not perfunctory box-ticking exercises. They lie at the heart of the decision-making process.

On appeal, we argued that those questions had not been properly addressed by the Court below.

Court of Appeal

In its decision delivered 17 April 2026, the Court of Appeal accepted that the trial judge had been entitled to identify concerns about the mother’s conduct, it was however made clear by the Court that this was not the end of the analysis. A finding of so-called “alienating behaviour” does not automatically justify removing children from one parent or ending contact by that parent. The court must still ask: what outcome is actually best for these children?

In this case, the Court of Appeal found that the reasoning behind the decision of the trial judge below was simply not there. The judgment did not explain why such a drastic change was necessary, nor did it properly engage with important factors such as the children’s own wishes or the impact of removing them from a long-standing shared care arrangement.

The Court was also critical of the delay in delivering the original judgment. Some seven months had passed between the hearing and the decision being handed down, which the Court described as “wholly unacceptable” in a case involving children.

The appeal by the mother was allowed. The order was set aside, and the case will be reconsidered by a different judge. In the meantime, the children will continue with the shared care arrangement they have known, having ample contact with both parents.

This was an important outcome—not only because it determined where the children should ultimately live, but because it ensured and reaffirmed that such decisions will be made properly. Cases like this are rarely simple. They involve strong emotions, competing and conflicting accounts, and real concern for children on both sides. But even in those circumstances, a court must take care to explain its reasoning and to weigh all of the relevant factors.

For families going through similar disputes, the message is a straightforward one. Serious allegations do not replace the need for careful, balanced decision-making. The court’s role is not simply to react to concerns, but to stand back and ask what arrangement will truly serve the children’s best interests.

How can Hampson and Company help?

At Hampson and Company, we regularly act in complex and sensitive family cases of this nature, including appeals where decisions require careful scrutiny. Our approach is always the same: to focus on what matters most, and to ensure that our clients’ cases are presented clearly, thoughtfully, and effectively.

Our team of family lawyers offer a wealth of understanding and expertise to assist you in children law matters including parental alienation and relocation, as well as all aspects of divorce, division of matrimonial property, maintenance, and pre and post-nuptial agreements.

If you would like to discuss a family matter in confidence, please contact Yvonne Mullen of Hampson and Company at: ymullen@hampsonandco.com.