Report comment

Mr Ryan fails to understand that it is primarily the right of the child to a relationship with the father that the court is concerned with.

Q v Q does not only concern what contact (including indirect) if any the child can safely have with his father, but also the mother's application for a s91 (14) direction preventing the father from making fresh applications concerning the child: a serious interference with the father's access to justice, therefore.

It may very well be that the father in Q v Q cannot safely have contact with his own son, even in terms of indirect letterbox contact. The Court, however, needs to have the materials necessary to make a fair decision. That is what Munby is after in this case.