[EasyDNNnews:IfExists:Event][EasyDNNnews:EventDate][EasyDNNnews:EndIf:Event][EasyDNNnews:IfNotExists:Event]11 November[EasyDNNnews:EndIf:Event] [EasyDNNnews:Categories separator=" " last] [EasyDNNnews:IfExists:Comments] [EasyDNNnews:Comments] [EasyDNNnews:EndIf:Comments] O v C [2025] EWFC 334 [EasyDNNnews:IfExists:Tags] [EasyDNNnews:Tags separator=", "] [EasyDNNnews:EndIf:Tags] [EasyDNNnews:IfExists:Event] [EasyDNNnews:IfExists:EventLocation] [EasyDNNnews:EventLocation] [EasyDNNnews:EndIf:EventLocation] [EasyDNNnews:EventDate] [EasyDNNnews:EndIf:Event] A mother applied to set aside what she submitted were findings made five years ago by a district judge concerning the party’s two children in reliance upon a report prepared by Ms G. The court found that there was no doubt at all that the harm that Ms G put forward arose, in her view, from what she regarded as the mother’s behaviour in alienating the children. Ms G had carried out an assessment of the mother which included her own attachment and other behaviours, but that did not form a finding of fact about how the mother actually behaved. Therefore there were no findings with a solid foundation that the mother alienated the children even though the judge expressed it as such, and accordingly no findings to actually set aside.