Private Law Pathfinder: A practitioner’s guide to navigating Pathfinder court cases
Introduction: Understanding the Private Law Pathfinder Model
This article aims to provide further information on private law Pathfinder cases for practitioners to navigate. From day 1 of an application through to decision hearing, this article details the Pathfinder process and incorporates guidance and first-hand experience.
The Pathfinder Pilot was introduced following the publication of the Harm Panel Report in 2020 which called for widespread reform to the family court system. It was envisaged that this reformed approach to family proceedings would be less adversarial in nature, instead adopting a problem-solving approach whilst also providing support to those who are victims of domestic abuse. On that note, the pilot forms part of the wider government initiative to tackle violence against women and girls (VAWG).
In court centres that adopt the Pathfinder model, the usual Child Arrangements Programme (CAP) in private law proceedings is suspended and replaced with a revised process with a reduced number of hearings.
It should be noted that the Pathfinder process will only apply to proceedings issued from the launch date in a respective court centre. Proceedings issued prior to any launch date will remain unaffected and follow the usual CAP.
Aims of the Pathfinder Pilot: Reducing delay and improving case outcomes
The principal aims of the Pathfinder pilot are in first instance to reduce the number of hearings before the family courts, thereby reducing the amount of delay.
Having been fortunate enough to have been invited to attend a Pathfinder Partnership Day in Stoke-on-Trent ahead of the Pathfinder rollout across the West Midlands, the impact of the pilot on delay was evident. Speakers from practitioners and judges from Birmingham, where the pilot had been in place for 12 months confirmed that the conclusion time for cases in the Pathfinder courts stood at 16 weeks in comparison to 67 weeks under CAP.
By reducing the number of hearings, the expectation is that the parties will engage to narrow issues avoiding the need for heavy judicial intervention unless completely necessary.
Where the Pathfinder Pilot operates: National rollout and key Court centres
Since its inception in 2022, the Pathfinder pilot has been rolled out across the country to recently include the West Midlands. Currently, 21% of all private law proceedings are heard in Pathfinder courts. On the Northern Circuit, practitioners are most likely to experience Pathfinder cases in courts in North Wales and West Yorkshire (Leeds, Bradford and Huddersfield).
Day 1: Application stage and initial safeguarding processes
The application stage happens on day 1. An initial check is completed to ensure the application has been completed and nothing remains outstanding. A robust approach is applied in this first instance and any incomplete or incorrectly filed applications will be returned. With this, a request is made to the local authority to determine if they have had any recent involvement in the last 12 weeks. This check cuts time down later in the process when determining who is to write the Child Impact Report, as CAFCASS will only author the report if there has been no such local authority involvement.
During the application stage any safeguarding checks are requested and completed within 7 days of the application being received by the court. Once these steps have been taken and completed, a referral will be made to a Family Court Advisor ['FCA'] for the first stage of gatekeeping.
Day 2: Gatekeeping stage 1 and commissioning of the Child Impact Report
During the first gatekeeping stage, the FCA will direct the local authority or Cafcass (whoever is applicable) to complete a ‘Child Impact Report’ (CIR). There is an estimated timeframe of 8/10 weeks for the completion of the CIR.
It will be issued to the relevant agency who will commence preparation of the report. Once the procedural steps have been taken at the first gatekeeping stage, the appropriate authority will begin in preparing the report. Information is gathered about the family to include any risks and welfare issues. There will also be appropriate referrals to domestic abuse support if required, with the Pathfinder model being keen to promote the attendance of Independent Domestic Abuse Advisors [‘IDVA’] at court.
During this stage, the FCA will set a date for the second gatekeeping stage, where the report will be reviewed as a paper-based exercise only. The model is driven by front loading so that from the start the court has better more detailed information from relevant agencies.
For Cafcass it is an alternate way of working and greater emphasis is placed on the child(ren)’s wishes and feelings. During the Pathfinder Partnership Day, it was confirmed that 80% of children were being spoken to before the report comes to court, a significant increase in the number that are spoken to during the preparation of Section 7 reports.
Weeks 8–10: The Child Impact Report (CIR) and its role in private law proceedings
The CIR replaces the Safeguarding Letter and Section 7 Report as the summary of the enquiries made by Cafcass or the local authority in summarising the key evidence and issues for the court.
Once prepared and completed, the CIR is sent to the court and the parties.
The views of the child(ren) appear early on in the document, as does a photograph of the child(ren). It is designed in this way to focus the report on the lived experience of the child(ren) and put them at the centre of decision-making rather than pedal parental narratives.
The report is analytical in focus, documenting all safeguarding enquiries, agency input and direct work into one report. If domestic abuse is raised as an issue when preparing the CIR, independent domestic abuse workers will support the party and prepare a structured assessment to the author of the CIR which will then form part of the report.
Like a safeguarding letter or Section 7 report, the CIR will conclude with recommendations for the court either for final orders to be made if agreement is reached between the parties, or list for a decision hearing if judicial oversight is required. It is important to note that a CIR can recommend that matters such as child arrangements be concluded by way of final order whilst specific issues such as schooling remain in dispute. It is not uncommon therefore to have a decision hearing listed to deal with discrete issues when child arrangements have been finalised in the form of a final order.
Crucially, substantial evidential weight is attached to the recommendations of the CIR akin to that attached to conclusions reached in Section 7 reports. Such recommendations should therefore not be disregarded without clear, reasoned justification.
Gatekeeping Stage 2: Judicial review of the CIR and procedural directions
Once the CIR is received by the court, a judge and legal advisor will review the report on paper without the attendance of the parties. Any risks and welfare issues will be discussed, and final orders will be made at this stage if possible. Parties will receive an order from this hearing which may list the matter for decision hearing if further judicial intervention is required. Should that be the case, the date, time and venue of the hearing will be detailed on the face of the order. Ordinarily, a case is listed for a decision hearing within 2 weeks.
It is important to note that any party wishing to challenge the recommendations of the CIR must do so within 7 days of the GK2 hearing (FPR r4.3) [The 7-day right to vary an order made on the court‘s own initiative without hearing the parties or giving opportunity to make representations is contained within rule 4.3(4)-(6), Family Procedure Rules 2010]. This is achieved by way of applying to vary the order that is received following the GK2 hearing. A party may wish to challenge the recommendations of the CIR by seeking the attendance of the author at the decision hearing, or by requesting permission to disclose written questions.
Also at this stage, the Case Progression Officer (CPO) will make contact with any litigant in person to ensure they understand the next steps.
It is incumbent on the judge or legal advisor to identify any potential gaps in the CIR and if identified, judges must attempt to resolve these gaps themselves by using the existing evidence or seeking clarification or further input. Such clarification however is unlikely to take the form of an addendum CIR. If further concerns are identified following receipt of the CIR, it may direct further to include work from CAFCASS or the local authority, drug testing, narrative statements, expert reports and the like. If such concerns are raised, it is likely that the matter will be listed for further hearing to consider this new evidence.
Weeks 10+: The decision hearing and the Pathfinder problem-solving approach
Then the model reaches the decision hearing which will be held in front of a Judge or the Magistrates with a Legal Advisor. It will be listed for 1 hour if before a Judge and 90 minutes if before the Magistrates.
This hearing has the intended purpose of being a problem-solving hearing with Judges ‘getting their hands dirty’. Judges in Pathfinder courts must undertake problem solving training and are expected to adopt a proactive, inquisitorial approach – known as a ‘lean in’ model.
It hopes to change the dynamic between the parties and Judge with it being framed around the CIR and the child’s voice. The judge is expected to start from the voice of the child and centre discussions around what the child has said. It is with the hope that proceedings can conclude within reasonable timings and give the family stability.
The CIR author is not expected to attend this hearing.
If an agreement cannot be reached at this hearing, the Judge or Magistrates are able to make a decision.
During the pilot of the Pathfinder and progression to different areas, statistics show that 50.5% of cases finalise here.
Week 12+: Final Hearing (where necessary)
Should a decision not be reached at the decision hearing, a final hearing can be listed as required but expected to be the exception rather than the norm.
Conclusion: Impact of the Pathfinder Pilot on private law proceedings
To conclude, there has been clear success in and around the Pathfinder within the areas it is operating in:
Cases are being closed 11 weeks faster.
Open cases have been cut by 50%.
Hearings per case have fallen from 5 to between 1.3 – 1.4.
The proportion of children being seen by a social worker has increased from 34% to 65% - 80%.
Public law open cases have been cut by 21%.
Pathfinder sits within a wider context of goals to halve violence against women and girls, in line with the VAWG strategy, looks to the domestic abuse protection orders which can go further with tougher restrictions and Qualified Legal Representatives.
Written by James Woods and Lara Webber, Pupil Barristers at Unit Chambers.
Law is correct as of 3rd December 2025. Whilst every effort has been taken to ensure that the law in this article is correct, it is intended to give a general overview of the law for educational purposes. Readers are respectfully reminded that it is not intended to be a substitute for specific legal advice and should not be relied upon for this purpose. No liability is accepted for any error or omission contained herein.
