Child Arrangements Reform in England & Wales: What the Courts & Tribunals Bill and CAFCASS Changes Mean

The landscape of child arrangements reform UK is shifting faster in 2026 than at any point since the Children and Families Act 2014 replaced residence and contact orders with the single Child Arrangements Order. Two parallel reform strands are converging: the Courts and Tribunals Bill, published on 25 February 2026 and now progressing through its parliamentary Committee stage, and CAFCASS’s national rollout of a new private-law model that began in pathfinder areas from January 2026. Together, these changes alter the procedural pathway for every private-law children application filed in England and Wales, from initial triage through to enforcement.

Whether you are a parent facing proceedings, a family solicitor advising clients, or a CAFCASS officer adapting to a revised operational framework, the checklists and timelines below set out exactly what has changed, what is proposed, and what you need to do now.

What Exactly Is Changing: A High-Level Summary of the Family Court Reform 2026

The reforms fall into two distinct but overlapping categories. Understanding both is essential before diving into the detail.

Legislative changes: the Courts and Tribunals Bill

The Bill, introduced as a Government Bill in the House of Commons, primarily targets the Crown Court backlog, but several of its provisions have a direct or indirect bearing on child arrangements in England and Wales. The key areas that affect family practitioners include:

• Allocation and case-management streamlining. The Bill proposes to reform how cases are allocated between courts and to modernise operational arrangements, with the stated aim of reducing open caseloads and ensuring cases are heard by the appropriate tier of judiciary.
• Appeals reform. Proposals to replace certain automatic rights of appeal with permission-based appeals could, if extended by secondary legislation, affect the route by which family-law decisions are challenged.
• Measures to protect children and ensure fairer trials for victims. The Bill introduces provisions aimed at the criminal–family interface, including protections for children and victims that may reshape how safeguarding evidence is handled across jurisdictions.

Operational changes: the CAFCASS private law model

Running in parallel, CAFCASS has been rolling out its Child-Focused Model, developed through the pathfinder programme in areas such as West Yorkshire, Stoke, Worcester, West Midlands, Hampshire, Isle of Wight and Dorset. The core changes include:

• Earlier CAFCASS involvement. Family Court Advisers (FCAs) engage with families sooner after a C100 application is issued, conducting initial safeguarding checks and triage before the First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment (FHDRA).
• Child Impact Reports. Under the new model, CAFCASS is placing greater emphasis on capturing the child’s voice early, through structured Child Impact Analysis rather than relying solely on later Section 7 reports.
• “Our Child’s Plan.” Parents are encouraged to engage with a structured planning tool, replacing adversarial position statements with a child-centred document that focuses on the child’s needs and daily routine.

Quick timeline snapshot

The Courts and Tribunals Bill, Direct Effects on Child Arrangements

The Courts and Tribunals Bill was published on 25 February 2026, with an accompanying factsheet setting out the Government’s policy objectives. The Bill’s long title confirms it makes “provision in relation to criminal courts in England and Wales” and also addresses “the leadership of tribunals”, but several of its mechanisms have consequences that ripple into private-law children proceedings.

Key provisions affecting family practitioners

Caseload reduction and allocation. The Bill’s primary ambition is to reduce the Crown Court open caseload, which the Government’s own impact assessment noted had more than doubled since 2019 and stood at 79,619 cases in September 2025. Although this target is criminal, the practical effect on family courts is significant. Crown Court sitting days are allocated from the same HMCTS budget, and any freeing of judicial and administrative resources has a knock-on effect on family court listing capacity. Industry observers expect the Bill’s caseload provisions to indirectly shorten the wait times for contested children hearings, though the extent of this benefit remains uncertain.

Removing the defendant’s right to elect Crown Court trial in either-way cases. This headline provision is designed to divert cases away from the Crown Court. For family practitioners, the significance lies in its impact on linked criminal and family proceedings, where, for example, a parent faces a criminal charge arising from a domestic-abuse allegation that also underpins a fact-finding hearing in the family court. If certain either-way offences are resolved more quickly in the magistrates’ court, the corresponding fact-finding exercise in family proceedings may receive earlier certainty about criminal outcomes.

Appeals reform. The Bill proposes to reform the appeals process from magistrates’ courts to the Crown Court, replacing certain automatic appeal rights with a permission requirement. While this provision targets criminal appeals, the Bar Council has noted in its Second Reading briefing that any narrowing of appeal rights must be monitored carefully to ensure it does not set a precedent for restricting appellate access in other jurisdictions. Family practitioners should watch for any amendments at Committee stage that could affect the route by which family-court allocation decisions or enforcement orders are challenged.

Child protection and victim measures. The Bill introduces measures that “ensure fairer trials for victims” and “protect children.” These provisions, subject to parliamentary amendment, could introduce stricter controls on cross-examination of vulnerable witnesses and new safeguarding duties that align with the family court’s existing Practice Direction 12J obligations in cases involving domestic abuse.

It is important to note that the Bill remains subject to amendment as it progresses through Committee. The Public Bill Committee met for its first sitting on 25 March 2026, and the Law Society has already provided written evidence raising concerns about practical implementation. Practitioners should monitor the parliamentary Bills tracker for updated provisions.

CAFCASS Private Law Model: What Parents and Lawyers Must Expect

The CAFCASS changes represent the most immediate, ground-level shift for anyone involved in child arrangements in England and Wales. Unlike the Bill, which requires Royal Assent before taking statutory effect, the CAFCASS model changes are operational and are already being applied in pathfinder courts.

How the new model works in practice

Under the previous model, CAFCASS’s initial role in private-law proceedings was largely confined to completing safeguarding letters (formerly known as Schedule 2 letters) and, where directed, preparing Section 7 welfare reports. Contact with families before the FHDRA was limited.

The private-law model changes this sequence in several important ways:

• Pre-FHDRA engagement. FCAs now contact both parents before the first hearing to conduct safeguarding checks and begin building a picture of the child’s circumstances. This replaces the previous reliance on a single telephone call.
• Child Impact Analysis. Rather than waiting for a court direction to prepare a Section 7 report, CAFCASS now undertakes earlier child-focused analysis to identify the child’s needs, wishes and feelings. This document informs the FHDRA and helps the judge make more targeted case-management directions.
• “Our Child’s Plan.” Families are encouraged to work with their FCA to produce a structured plan that focuses on the child’s daily routine, schooling, health needs and relationships. The plan is designed to replace adversarial position statements with a collaborative, child-centred document.
• Stronger emphasis on non-court dispute resolution. The new model explicitly steers suitable cases toward mediation, family group conferences and other forms of non-court dispute resolution before contested hearings are listed.

How long do CAFCASS assessments take under the new model?

Timing has been one of the most common concerns raised by solicitors in pathfinder areas. Under the previous framework, Section 7 reports could take 12 to 16 weeks from the date of the court’s direction. Early indications from pathfinder courts suggest that the Child Impact Analysis is being completed more quickly, often before the FHDRA, but that the full welfare report timescale remains broadly similar where a case proceeds to a contested final hearing. Parents should prepare for an initial CAFCASS contact within weeks of their C100 being issued, rather than assuming they have months before engagement begins.

Presumption of Parental Involvement, What Stays, What Changes

One of the most frequently asked questions in the context of child arrangements reform UK is whether the presumption of parental involvement, enshrined in Section 1(2A) of the Children Act 1989, is being repealed.

The current position is that the presumption has not been repealed. The Courts and Tribunals Bill, as published, does not contain a provision removing or amending Section 1(2A). The presumption remains: unless the court has evidence that involvement of a parent in the child’s life would put the child at risk of suffering harm, the court must presume that the involvement of each parent in the child’s life will further the child’s welfare.

When the presumption is rebutted in practice

The presumption is not absolute and is regularly displaced in cases involving:

• Domestic abuse. Where there are findings of fact under Practice Direction 12J, or where the evidence demonstrates a pattern of controlling or coercive behaviour, the court may conclude that the presumption is rebutted.
• Safeguarding concerns. Where CAFCASS’s safeguarding checks or Child Impact Analysis reveal a risk of physical, emotional or sexual harm, the court will prioritise the child’s safety under the welfare checklist in Section 1(3) of the Children Act 1989.
• Substance misuse or mental-health issues. Where there is credible evidence that a parent’s condition poses a direct risk to the child, the court may order supervised contact or, in serious cases, no direct contact.

Industry observers expect that the CAFCASS model’s emphasis on earlier child-voice work and pre-FHDRA safeguarding analysis will mean that the presumption is addressed, and where necessary, rebutted, at an earlier stage in proceedings than was previously typical. This represents a significant procedural acceleration for high-risk cases.

Non-Court Dispute Resolution vs Court Application: When to Choose Which Route

The 2026 reforms reinforce what family law has been moving toward for years: court should be the last resort, not the first. Both the Courts and Tribunals Bill’s emphasis on efficient allocation and CAFCASS’s new model actively promote non-court dispute resolution in family law as the preferred starting point.

Indicators that ADR is appropriate

• Both parents are willing to communicate, even if they disagree on specifics.
• There are no safeguarding concerns or allegations of domestic abuse.
• The dispute centres on logistics, school-night arrangements, holiday splitting, handover times, rather than whether contact should happen at all.
• A Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (MIAM) has been completed or is booked. MIAMs remain a mandatory prerequisite before filing a C100, subject to statutory exemptions.

Indicators that an urgent court application is needed

• There is a risk of abduction or unauthorised removal of the child from the jurisdiction.
• Domestic abuse, coercive control or safeguarding allegations make direct negotiation unsafe.
• A child is at immediate risk of harm.
• One parent is deliberately obstructing contact in breach of an existing order.

Understanding the boundary between mediation models and court is particularly important under the new CAFCASS framework, because FCAs will actively explore whether ADR has been properly considered before recommending contested hearing directions.

Preparing for a CAFCASS Assessment: Step-by-Step Checklists

With CAFCASS now engaging earlier in proceedings, preparation is more important, and more time-sensitive, than ever. The following checklists apply under the new private-law model.

Checklist for parents

• Focus on your child, not the other parent. CAFCASS officers are trained to identify when a parent is using the process to air grievances. Centre every conversation on your child’s needs, routine and wellbeing.
• Prepare a daily-routine document. Write out your child’s typical week: school, activities, mealtimes, bedtime. This feeds directly into “Our Child’s Plan.”
• Gather key documents. School reports, medical records, any existing court orders, correspondence showing attempts to agree arrangements.
• Be honest about safeguarding. If there are concerns about domestic abuse, substance misuse or mental-health issues, whether your own or the other parent’s, disclose them early. Late disclosure undermines credibility.
• Understand the child’s voice. If your child is old enough, be prepared for the FCA to speak to them directly. Do not coach your child or discuss court proceedings with them.
• Attend every scheduled call and meeting. Under the new model, a missed CAFCASS appointment before the FHDRA can result in an adverse inference.

Checklist for solicitors

• Prepare your client for early contact. Warn clients that CAFCASS will likely reach out within weeks of the C100 being issued, not months.
• Compile a chronology. A clear, concise chronology of the relationship, separation and any incidents is essential for both the FCA and the court.
• Gather safeguarding evidence early. Police disclosure requests (using appropriate forms), GP letters, school records and social-services involvement records should all be instructed at the point of filing.
• Draft “Our Child’s Plan” proactively. Do not wait for CAFCASS to initiate this. A solicitor-prepared draft plan, focused on the child’s best interests, demonstrates cooperation and positions your client favourably.
• Review the CAFCASS private-law model guidance. Ensure you are familiar with the operational changes in your local court area, particularly if you are in a pathfinder region.

Common mistakes parents make in CAFCASS assessments

• Talking about the other parent rather than the child.
• Failing to attend or rescheduling CAFCASS appointments.
• Coaching the child or discussing the case with them.
• Withholding safeguarding information until a later hearing.
• Submitting lengthy, argumentative position statements instead of concise, child-focused documents.
• Refusing to engage with “Our Child’s Plan” on the basis that the other parent is unreasonable.
• Ignoring MIAM requirements and having the C100 returned.
• Posting about the case on social media, CAFCASS officers do check.
• Arriving at the FHDRA without having read the CAFCASS safeguarding letter.
• Underestimating how much weight the court places on CAFCASS’s early analysis.

Contact Orders Enforcement and Safety: Thresholds and What to Do if Orders Are Breached

Where a Child Arrangements Order is in force and one parent is not complying, the other parent has several enforcement routes available. The 2026 reforms do not fundamentally change the statutory enforcement framework, but the likely practical effect of quicker CAFCASS involvement and more efficient court listing will be faster access to enforcement mechanisms.

Enforcement options

• Return to court (enforcement application). Under Section 11J of the Children Act 1989, a court can make an enforcement order imposing an unpaid work requirement on a parent who has breached a Child Arrangements Order without reasonable excuse.
• Contempt of court. In serious or persistent cases of breach, the court may commit the non-compliant parent for contempt, though this remains a last resort.
• Variation of the order. The court may vary the living or contact arrangements if enforcement proves ineffective, including, in extreme cases, transferring the child’s primary residence.
• Police involvement. Where a breach amounts to a criminal offence, such as child abduction under the Child Abduction Act 1984, the police should be contacted immediately.

Protective steps where there is a safety concern

If a child is at risk, parents and solicitors should not wait for the next listed hearing. Immediate protective steps include applying for a non-molestation order under the Family Law Act 1996, seeking a prohibited-steps order to prevent removal from the jurisdiction, and contacting the local authority’s children’s services where there is a child-protection concern. CAFCASS’s earlier involvement under the new model means that safeguarding flags raised before the FHDRA are more likely to result in protective directions at the first hearing.

Practical Scenarios: Three Vignettes with Recommended Actions

Scenario 1: Both parents cooperate but disagree on overnight stays

The parents separated amicably. Both want the child to have a strong relationship with each parent, but they cannot agree on whether midweek overnights are appropriate for a five-year-old. Recommended action: Attend a MIAM, engage with “Our Child’s Plan” through CAFCASS, and propose a trial arrangement. Court is unlikely to be necessary.

Scenario 2: Allegations of domestic abuse

The applicant parent alleges a pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour by the other parent. Police reports and a GP letter support the allegations. Recommended action: Apply for a non-molestation order alongside the C100. Ensure all safeguarding evidence is disclosed to CAFCASS at the earliest contact. Prepare for a fact-finding hearing and anticipate that CAFCASS will recommend supervised contact pending findings.

Scenario 3: Disputed relocation within England

One parent wishes to relocate 150 miles away for a new job, which would disrupt the existing contact arrangements. Recommended action: The relocating parent should file a specific-issue application or seek a variation of the existing order. Both parents should engage with CAFCASS to produce a revised “Our Child’s Plan” that addresses travel logistics, schooling and the child’s existing friendships. The court will apply the welfare checklist and is unlikely to permit a move that is not in the child’s best interests.

Conclusion: Immediate Action Steps for Child Arrangements Reform UK

The convergence of the Courts and Tribunals Bill and the CAFCASS private-law model rollout marks the most significant procedural shift in private-law children proceedings in over a decade. Whether the Bill completes its passage through Parliament without further amendment remains to be seen, but the operational CAFCASS changes are already live and affecting every new application. The five actions that parents and lawyers should take immediately are clear:

1. Prepare for early CAFCASS engagement. Have your documents, chronology and child-focused plan ready from the moment the C100 is filed.
2. Engage with “Our Child’s Plan.” Treat it as a strategic document, not an afterthought.
3. Review safeguarding evidence now. If there are concerns, gather police disclosure, GP records and school reports before proceedings begin.
4. Explore non-court dispute resolution first. The new framework actively rewards early cooperation and penalises unnecessary litigation.
5. Monitor the Bill’s progress. Check the parliamentary Bills tracker regularly for amendments that may affect appeals, allocation or enforcement procedures.

Sources

1. GOV.UK, Courts and Tribunals Bill
2. GOV.UK, Courts and Tribunals Bill: Factsheet
3. UK Parliament, Courts and Tribunals Bill
4. CAFCASS, Child Focused Courts
5. CAFCASS, Our Role in Private Law Proceedings
6. Bar Council, Courts and Tribunals Bill Second Reading Briefing
7. The Law Society, Courts and Tribunals Bill
8. Citizens Advice, Making Child Arrangements