By 
Family law guide
A father came to us after months of missed handovers. He asked whether an enforcement order from the family court could get his weekends back. The child arrangements order was clear about when his child should be with him. In practice, the handovers kept failing. Sometimes the door stayed shut. Other times a message arrived an hour before, saying the visit was off. Our family law specialists advised and guided him through the application that followed.
This is an anonymised account, shared with the client’s consent. We have changed or left out every detail that could identify the family.
The moment he decided to act
For a long time, he tried to sort it out himself. He sent polite messages and offered new times. He even agreed to collect his child from a different place. Each time, things settled for a week or two and then fell apart again. His fear was simple. He thought every missed weekend made the next one easier to miss, and that his child was slowly drifting away from him.
He also worried that going back to court would make things worse at home. That worry is common, and it is a fair one. Still, he reached the point where waiting felt more harmful than acting.
What the law says about an enforcement order in the family court
The power sits in section 11J of the Children Act 1989. Under s.11J(2), the court must be sure beyond reasonable doubt that the order was broken. That is the criminal standard of proof. Under s.11J(3) and (4), the other parent can avoid an order by showing a reasonable excuse. That parent has to prove the excuse, but only on the balance of probabilities.
Several other rules apply too. Section 11I requires a warning notice to be attached to the order, and s.11K says the person in breach must have been given it or told what it says. Section 11L then asks whether an order is necessary to secure compliance, and whether its likely effect is proportionate to the seriousness of the breach. The court must also weigh the child’s welfare. If it does make an order, Schedule A1 sets the unpaid work at between 40 and 200 hours.
Our guide to dealing with a breach of a child contact order covers the wider picture.
How we helped him prepare the enforcement order application
First, we checked the order itself. It carried the warning notice, and the other parent had been given a copy, so the s.11K hurdle was met. Next, we asked an honest question. Was the arrangement still right for the child, or had it simply stopped being followed? We concluded the order was workable. That meant enforcement was the right route, rather than an application to vary.
Then we built the evidence. The father had kept messages, and we helped him turn them into a dated schedule. Each entry showed the agreed handover, what happened, and the reason given at the time. The criminal standard needs specific dates, and a general account of a hard year rarely meets it.
He made the application himself on form C79. We helped him prepare it and advised him to keep the focus on the child. His application asked the court to make the existing arrangements work.
What the family court decided on the enforcement order
The court accepted that the order had not been followed on several occasions. It did not accept the explanations offered for most of them. Even so, the court decided an unpaid work requirement was not needed to secure compliance. Instead, it varied the order so that handovers take place at school, away from the doorstep. The court also directed a Cafcass officer to monitor compliance under s.11H.
Since then, the handovers have taken place. The father sees his child on the weekends the order sets out. Outcomes of this kind turn entirely on the evidence in each case. Nothing here is a prediction about any other case.
What you can take from this
Sometimes the most useful outcome is a change that makes the order easier to follow. However, the court will only reach that point if your evidence is specific. Keep a dated record from the first missed handover. Check that your order carries the warning notice. Then ask early whether enforcement or variation suits your child better.
Fathers in this position often feel like visitors in their own child’s life. Our page on children matters for fathers explains the rights you already have. You can also read how we prepare and review these success stories.
“Write down every failed handover on the day it happens: the time, what was said, and any message that came before it. Keep your own replies short and polite, because a judge may read them. An enforcement order can only be made if the court is satisfied it is necessary to get the order followed and proportionate to the breach, so go to court knowing what practical change would help handovers happen for your child.”
Hannah Overton, Complex Children Specialist, Kabir Family Law
Talk it through with us first
If handovers have stopped and you are not sure what to do, a conversation is the right first step. A free initial consultation is confidential, and there is no obligation afterwards. One of our family law specialists will listen and then explain your options plainly. When you are ready, call 0330 094 5880.
The legal issue
A child arrangements order set out when a child was to spend time with their father. Over several months the handovers repeatedly failed. Sometimes nobody answered the door, and sometimes the visit was cancelled at short notice.
The father had tried to resolve it directly, offering new times and a different collection point. Each fix lasted a week or two. He came to us worried that every missed weekend was loosening his bond with his child, and unsure whether going back to court would help or make things worse.
The law this rests on
- Children Act 1989 s.1(1) - the child's welfare is the court's paramount consideration.
- Children Act 1989 s.11I - a child arrangements order must carry a warning notice about the consequences of not complying.
- Children Act 1989 s.11J(2) - the court may make an enforcement order only if it is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the order has been breached.
- Children Act 1989 s.11J(3) and (4) - no enforcement order if the person had a reasonable excuse; they must prove it on the balance of probabilities.
- Children Act 1989 s.11K - no enforcement order unless the person had been given a copy of the warning notice or otherwise told what it says.
- Children Act 1989 s.11L - the order must be necessary to secure compliance and its likely effect proportionate to the seriousness of the breach, and the court must take the child's welfare into account.
- Children Act 1989 s.11H - when making or varying a child arrangements order, the court may ask a Cafcass officer to monitor compliance with a child arrangements order.
- Children Act 1989 Schedule A1 para 3B - an unpaid work requirement is between 40 and 200 hours in total.
How we approached it
We first checked that the order carried the warning notice required by s.11I and that the other parent had been given a copy, because s.11K bars an enforcement order without it. We then asked whether the order still suited the child. It did, so enforcement was the right route rather than an application to vary.
Because s.11J(2) applies the criminal standard, we helped the father turn his messages into a dated schedule of each agreed handover, what happened and the reason given at the time. He then applied on form C79 with our guidance. We helped him prepare it so that it kept the focus on the child and asked the court to make the existing arrangements work.
The outcome
The court accepted that the order had been breached on several occasions and did not accept the explanations offered for most of them. Applying s.11L, it decided unpaid work was not needed to secure compliance. It varied the order so that handovers take place at school and directed a Cafcass officer to monitor compliance under s.11H. The handovers have taken place since.
Outcomes of this kind turn entirely on the evidence in the individual case. Nothing here is a prediction or a promise about any other case.
What to take from this
- Check your order for the warning notice. Children Act 1989 s.11K prevents an enforcement order unless the other parent was given it or told what it says.
- Breach must be proved beyond reasonable doubt under Children Act 1989 s.11J(2), so keep a dated record from the first missed handover.
- The other parent must prove any reasonable excuse, on the balance of probabilities, under s.11J(3) and (4).
- The court will only make an enforcement order if it is necessary and proportionate to the seriousness of the breach under s.11L, and it must consider the child's welfare.
- A practical change, such as handovers at school, plus monitoring under s.11H, can do more than a penalty.
- Ask early whether your order needs enforcing or varying. They are different applications.
Checked and approved for publication by Iblal Iqbal.
Last reviewed .
![Prest v Petrodel [2013] UKSC 34: What It Really Decided](https://www.kabirfamilylaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Prest-v-Petrodel-1024x572.jpg)
![Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42: What It Decided](https://www.kabirfamilylaw.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Radmacher-v-Granatino-1024x572.jpg)
