When Christmas contact becomes a courtroom issue: How judges make decisions, and what parents should expect

Christmas should be a joyful and grounding time for children, but for separated families, it is often the period when unresolved tensions are pushed to the forefront. When communication has broken down or safeguarding concerns arise, the Family Court may need to intervene to decide what arrangements are safe and appropriate. Having represented many parents facing this very scenario, I’ve seen how important itis to understand not just the law, but the principles that guide judges during urgent holiday disputes.

How the court approaches Christmas contact disputes

Every decision starts with the same foundation: the welfare of the child is the court’s paramount consideration (Children Act 1989, s.1). That welfare-focused lens becomes even sharper during the festive period, when routine is disrupted, and emotions run high.

In the High Court’s decision in EDand MG [2025] EWHC 1876 (Fam), the court was asked to determine complex child arrangements for a three-year-old boy, including whether Christmas and Easter should be shared. The child was conceived through IVF abroad using the mother’s egg and anonymous donor sperm. Although the applicant was not the biological father, the court found he had acted as the child’s parent from the beginning and remained a central attachment figure. The mother later attempted to remove him from the child’s birth certificate and minimise his involvement, but the Independent Social Worker and the court agreed that this went against the child’s welfare. The judge emphasised that a child’s welfare is best served by stability, predictability, and time with both parents, even where the adults’relationship has broken down.

Judges will also consider the“welfare checklist,” including the child’s needs, the likely impact of any change in arrangements, how safe they will be, and each parent’s ability to meet their needs. However, in Christmas cases, certain themes carry even more weight, stability, safety, and the ability to shield the child from parental conflict.

If parents can’t agree on holiday plans, the matter can be brought back to court through a Specific Issue Order. But the message is clear: holiday contact should prioritise stability, fairness, and the child’s welfare above all.

When the court limits or suspends Christmas contact

In high-risk situations, courts may refuse or strictly limit Christmas contact. This is not a new concept, but recent case law has sharpened the boundaries.

In Re H-N and Others (children) (domestic abuse: finding of fact hearings) [2021] EWCA Civ 448,the Court of Appeal emphasised that the family court must properly evaluate patterns of coercive and controlling behaviour, rather than treating incidents in isolation. This has profoundly influenced Christmas contact decisions; if a parent poses an emotional or psychological risk, contact may be supervised or paused altogether.

When One Parent Wants to Travel or Spend Christmas Abroad

International or internal travel over Christmas adds an extra layer of complexity. Recent relocation judgments have shaped how courts view holiday travel proposals.

In A Mother v A Father [2024] EWFC 381 (B), the court emphasised the need for evidence-based planning and realistic proposals when a parent seeks time abroad. Similarly, MC v FG (Relocation) [2024] EWFC 204 (B) highlighted the importance of minimising disruption and ensuring the non-travelling parent retains meaningful contact.

Judges consistently expect parents to show willingness to cooperate, demonstrate flexibility, propose realistic and child-focused arrangements, and avoid exposing the child to conflict.

Courts will take a dim view of last-minute applications designed to “win Christmas.” The underlying question will always be: Is this truly about the child, or about the parent’s position?

Solicitor Behzad’s professional reflection

Christmas magnifies everything: joy,stress, loneliness, and conflict. When families are separating, these emotions often spill into disputes about holiday contact. But from my experience, the families who handle this period best are those who view Christmas through their child’s eyes. Judges do the same.

Case law may evolve, but the core principle never changes: children deserve a Christmas free from fear, uncertainty, or adult conflict.

As family law practitioners, our role is to guide parents toward solutions that promote stability, predictability, and emotional safety, whether through agreement, mediation, or, when necessary, court intervention.

‍