By 
Family law guide
Jack and Paul’s Law: What It Means for Child Contact
Part of: Presumption Of Parental Involvement In Family Law: What’s Changing And What It Means
Jack and Paul’s law is the name Parliament has heard for clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill, which would end the rule that family courts presume each parent’s involvement is good for a child. The name honours Jack and Paul, two brothers whose father killed them during contact the family court had allowed. The clause is not law yet. This guide explains what it would change, where the Bill has got to, and what already protects your child while you wait. It covers the law in England and Wales.
Key takeaways
- It is one clause of a wider Bill. Clause 17 would delete subsections (2A), (2B), (6) and (7) of section 1 of the Children Act 1989, which create the presumption that a parent’s involvement furthers a child’s welfare.
- It is not in force. The Bill has passed its Commons committee stage, and MPs are due to debate it at report stage on 13 October 2026 (Parliament: Courts and Tribunals Bill). The House of Lords must then consider it.
- Royal Assent will not switch it on. Under clause 26 of the Bill, clause 17 starts on a date the Lord Chancellor sets by regulations.
- Protection does not have to wait. Today the presumption covers only a parent whose involvement would not put the child at risk, and the court must consider that carefully where abuse is alleged.
- The child’s welfare stays paramount. Clause 17 leaves the welfare checklist, and the court’s power to order supervised, indirect or no contact, exactly as they are.
If contact feels unsafe now, book a free initial consultation and one of our specialists will give you initial advice on what the court can do today.
What is Jack and Paul’s law?
It is a campaign name for a single clause, not the title of a separate Act. The Bill gives clause 17 the heading “Welfare of the child: repeal of presumption of parental involvement”, and the clause does two things. First, it removes four subsections from section 1 of the Children Act 1989. Second, it repeals section 11 of the Children and Families Act 2014, which added the presumption in 2014.
Those subsections tell a court deciding a child arrangements application, or certain parental responsibility applications, to presume that each parent’s involvement will further the child’s welfare “unless the contrary is shown”. Involvement can be direct or indirect, and it never means any particular split of time. Campaigners usually call this the presumption of contact. Our guide to the presumption of parental involvement explains how courts have applied it.
Why does the law carry Jack and Paul’s names?
Their father killed Jack and his nine-year-old brother Paul in 2014, in a house fire he started during a two-hour unsupervised contact visit. A family court had allowed that contact. Their mother, Claire Throssell, has campaigned ever since for the courts to stop assuming that contact with an abusive parent is good for a child.
When the government announced on 22 October 2025 that it would repeal the presumption, it credited her campaign. At the Bill’s second reading on 10 March 2026, her MP, Dr Marie Tidball, called clause 17 “Jack and Paul’s law” in the Commons (Hansard). Claire Throssell later gave evidence to the committee of MPs examining the Bill.
Is Jack and Paul’s law in force yet?
No. The government introduced the Courts and Tribunals Bill in February 2026, and most of it deals with the criminal courts. In March the Commons agreed to carry it over, so the government reintroduced it in the new session in May 2026 without starting again.
- 25 February 2026First reading in the House of Commons.
- 10 March 2026Second reading, where clause 17 was given its campaign name.
- 25 March to 28 April 2026Committee stage, including evidence from Claire Throssell.
- 14 May 2026Carried over and reintroduced in the new session.
- 13 October 2026Report stage in the House of Commons, then third reading.
- House of LordsThe same stages again, with any changes sent back to MPs.
- Royal AssentThe Bill becomes an Act, but clause 17 does not start yet.
- RegulationsThe Lord Chancellor sets the date clause 17 takes effect.
Even after Royal Assent, there may be a gap. Clause 26 leaves the start date to regulations, and clause 22 lets the Lord Chancellor make transitional rules. Those rules will decide whether the change reaches cases already in court. Until then, the presumption remains part of section 1 of the Children Act 1989, and judges must apply it.
What changes in court when clause 17 starts, and what stays the same
The change is narrower than many headlines suggest. In its March 2026 announcement, the government said courts would instead “adopt an open-minded inquiry” into what is right for each child. That means no starting assumption either way, rather than a new assumption against contact.
| Question | Today | After clause 17 starts |
|---|---|---|
| Starting assumption | Each parent’s involvement is presumed to further the child’s welfare, unless shown otherwise, where that parent can be involved without putting the child at risk | None, either way |
| Main test | The child’s welfare is the court’s paramount consideration (s.1(1)) | Unchanged |
| Welfare checklist | The court weighs the s.1(3) factors, including any harm the child has suffered or is at risk of | Unchanged |
| Court’s options | Unsupervised, supervised or indirect contact, or none at all | Unchanged |
| Where it applies | England and Wales | England and Wales (clause 25) |
Does Jack and Paul’s law affect your case right now?
Answer three questions. The card below shows what the law already allows, what clause 17 would mean at your stage, and the one step worth taking now. Nothing you choose leaves this page.
Where does your case stand?
- Today
- What the law already lets the court do for your child.
- When clause 17 starts
- What the change would mean at your stage.
- Your next step
- The one thing worth doing now, before any change.
Beyond these three answersAnswer the questions above to fill in your card. Nothing you choose is saved or sent anywhere.
How the court protects children while the presumption still applies
Many parents believe the law forces contact until clause 17 starts. It does not. The presumption only ever applied to a parent who can take part in the child’s life without putting the child at risk of suffering harm (Children Act 1989, s.1(6)(a)). On top of that, Practice Direction 12J sets out duties the court has today.
- Test the presumption first. In every case, the court must consider carefully whether it applies, with particular regard to any allegation or evidence of domestic abuse (PD12J, para 7).
- No unmanageable risk, even for now. While disputed allegations are undecided, the court should not make an interim order that would expose the child or the other parent to an unmanageable risk of harm (para 25). The same test applies to the final decision (para 35).
- Safety before, during and after. Where the court finds that abuse happened, it should order contact only if it can, as far as possible, secure the safety of the child and the parent they live with. It must also be satisfied that the parent will not face further abuse (para 36).
- Disputed allegations can be tested. If they would affect the arrangements, the judge can direct a fact-finding hearing before deciding them.
Why raising concerns early matters
So the step that matters is getting your concerns in front of the court early, usually on form C1A. Waiting for the new law instead can leave an unsafe interim arrangement in place for months.
We assisted a mother who read about the campaign and assumed nothing could change until Parliament acted. Her children’s father had unsupervised weekends under an interim order. With our help she set out, in the order they happened, the incidents she had never written down, and what the children said after each visit. At the next hearing the judge moved contact to a supervised setting while the court looked into the allegations. Every case turns on its own evidence.
If domestic abuse has been alleged against you
Jack and Paul’s law does not make an allegation true, and it does not remove a parent from a child’s life. It removes a starting point. After it takes effect, a court will still ask what your child needs, using the same welfare checklist. Even today, the court can order supervised or indirect contact, or none, where the evidence calls for it.
What helps is specific, calm evidence. Keep to any order exactly. Answer each allegation on its own terms, saying what you accept and what you dispute, and keep records of the time you spend with your child. If you believe the allegations are untrue, our guide to false allegations of domestic violence covers the wider picture.
Other new limits on parental responsibility after abuse
Clause 17 is one of several recent changes. In a Commons debate on 21 May 2026, the Minister for Victims set out two more (Hansard). The Victims and Courts Act 2026 provides for automatic limits on how a parent sentenced for certain serious sexual offences can exercise parental responsibility. Jade’s law, passed in the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, provides for similar limits where one parent kills the other. Both work differently from clause 17, which changes how a court approaches a contested application. You can read more in our guide to domestic abuse and child contact.
Expert Tip
Do not build your case around the law changing. Build it around your child. Judges can already refuse or limit contact where it is not safe. What they need from you is a clear account: what happened, when, where the children were, and how they have been since. If you keep that record now, it will serve you whichever version of section 1 is in force on the day of your hearing.
Hannah Overton, Complex Children Specialist & Client Support
Jack and Paul’s law: frequently asked questions
Is Jack and Paul’s law its official name?
No. The Bill heads clause 17 “Welfare of the child: repeal of presumption of parental involvement”. Claire Throssell’s MP used the campaign name for it in the Commons at second reading.
When will clause 17 come into force?
There is no date yet. The Bill must finish its Commons stages and pass the House of Lords, then receive Royal Assent. After that, the Lord Chancellor sets the start date for clause 17 by regulations.
Will the change apply to a case that is already in court?
That has not been decided. Clause 22 lets the Lord Chancellor make transitional provision, and those regulations will say whether the change reaches cases already running. Until clause 17 starts, the court applies the presumption as it stands.
Does it mean an abusive parent will never see their child?
No. It removes the starting assumption that involvement helps the child. The court still decides each case on the child’s welfare, and it can order unsupervised, supervised or indirect contact, or none, depending on the evidence.
Can I ask the court to stop or limit contact before the change?
Yes. The presumption does not cover a parent whose involvement would put the child at risk of harm, and Practice Direction 12J requires the court to consider safety at every stage. Tell the court about your concerns as early as you can.
Does the change apply in Scotland or Northern Ireland?
No. Clause 25 says this part of the Bill extends to England and Wales only. The presumption it removes is in the Children Act 1989, which governs these cases in England and Wales.
Worried about contact while the law is still changing?
The real risk on this topic is waiting for Jack and Paul’s law to start before telling the court that contact is not safe. The protections exist now, and an interim arrangement left unchallenged can shape everything that follows.
A free initial consultation is a conversation with a specialist, who gives you initial advice tailored to your circumstances. If you safely can, have any court order to hand, together with the dates of the incidents that worry you.
Book a free initial consultation or call 0330 094 5880.
If you or your children are in immediate danger, call 999.
You can also read our guides to reasons to stop child contact and child contact centres, or return to domestic abuse and child contact.
General information about the law in England and Wales, not advice on your circumstances.
