Case No. ZE17P01593

. 3.On the 24th March 2021, F issued an application for a Child Arrangements Order for contact with both children (i.e., barely 8 weeks after the judgment). It should be noted that he has never met S (the youngest child). There was also an application for a Specific Issue Order, seeking a change of surname for S. The latter application, in particular, and in the context of my findings, reveals, at best, an arrogant lack of empathy for the effect that the protracted proceedings had already had on M and the elder child, Y. More than that, however, it reveals how F has used the Court proceedings as a different facet of controlling behaviour. 4.On the 21st May 2021, M’s legal team made applications for permission to disclose the judgment and the case papers to the police. Additionally, the application sought, in the event that no order for contact was made, to remove F’s Parental Responsibility. It would appear to require to be stated that disclosure of the judgment to the police does not require a Court order. Unless the court specifically prevents it, the police and CPS are entitled to a copy of a judgment pursuant to Family Procedure Rules r.12.73. The information within that judgment must only be used for the purposes of child protection and/or investigation of crime. M’s legal team also sought disclosure of the court order to F’s immigration lawyers. 5.The parties here are married. Accordingly, F is granted parental responsibility for his children automatically, see