Case No. EWFC-85

82. The mother alleges the father ‘stalked her and accessed her private communications’. 83. The stalking allegation arises from an incident on 27 June 2019 when the mother met her friend Mr C on a beach with the children for a picnic and then went back to Mr C’s nearby apartment. The father accepts that he went to the beach but did not reveal his presence, instead taking some photos using a zoom (pp197-198) and then sending a message to Mr C a few days later: “did you have a nice time at the beach with my wife and kids?” (p200). The father said he had been feeling unwell at home after an operation, but had then felt better and had decided to surprise his family by joining them at the beach. He was disconcerted to find Mr C with them, as he believed his wife to harbour romantic feelings for Mr C (who is mentioned in text messages between them in the context of the mother dressing sexily, for example pp174 and 176). 84. The mother has not mentioned any other incidents of ‘stalking’. I accept her account and Mr C’s account of an innocent afternoon, where the children were present throughout. I also accept the father’s evidence that he went to the beach to surprise his family but was instead surprised to see Mr C with his family. The father’s message to Mr C may be regarded as ‘passive-aggressive’ but the father took no action to follow this up with any further communication. The taking of 3 photos before going home and the sending of one message, after one unexpected event does not, in my judgement amount to abusive stalking behaviour. The court has not been told of any other incidents where the father has followed the mother or taken pictures of her without her knowledge. 85. The father accepts reviewing messages on the mother’s devices in 2012 (para 9 p 122) and 2018 (para 8 p121). He accepts sending one message to the pastor at his mother-in law’s church raising concerns about the mother’s communications with members of the congregation. I do not condone this behaviour, but in my judgement the evidence does not support a conclusion that the father’s actions were designed to make the mother subordinate or used to harm, punish or frighten her. It is unnecessary and disproportionate for detailed findings of fact to be made about these complaints and I do not consider them relevant to a risk assessment and decision-making for the children going forwards.