Skip to content

Case Studies — Real PA Cases, Deeply Investigated

Most case-law lists in this field are citation graveyards: case name, court, date, one-line holding, no humans. These case studies are the opposite. Each one identifies the named people involved (where public), the journalism trail, the lawyers and experts and judges, and what the case actually means doctrinally and practically.

If you are a parent or lawyer, these are the cases you will hear cited. Knowing the story behind the citation is what lets you understand which precedent applies to your situation and which doesn't.

Editorial position: we present each case from primary sources (judgment + reported press + practitioner commentary). Where critique exists, we report the critique. Where journalism uncovered systemic failures, we name what was uncovered and who uncovered it. CC BY 4.0. See CONTRIBUTING.md for editorial standards.

Synthesis pages — read these first

  • Global Comparison Matrix — single-page cross-jurisdictional matrix across all 18 jurisdictions. Apex direction of travel, statutory frameworks, reunification practice, key citations. Eight clear doctrinal groups + 2010-2025 timeline. The page lawyers and journalists should quote.
  • Open Question: a clean US appellate reversal — honest gap-documentation. No clean US appellate reversal of a substantive PA finding exists in the public record at this writing. 5 structural reasons + 7 paths a contributor could take to close the gap.

United Kingdom — the common-law doctrinal arc, 2019→2026

  1. Re A (Children) (Parental Alienation) [2019] EWFC B56 — HHJ Wildblood QC.
  2. Re S (Parental Alienation: Cult) [2020] EWCA Civ 568 — Peter Jackson LJ.
  3. Re H-N and Others [2021] EWCA Civ 448 — McFarlane P + Sharp PQBD + King LJ.
  4. Re Y (Experts and Alienating Behaviour: The Modern Approach) [2026] EWFC 38 — McFarlane P. Melanie Gill set-aside.

Arc: act early → act on findings → find facts properly → only with proper procedure.

Canada

  1. L.(A.G.) v D.(K.B.), 2009 — Justice McWatt, Ontario

United States

  1. Tsimhoni v Eibschitz-Tsimhoni, Michigan 2015
  2. In re Marriage of Humphries, 2024 COA 92

Europe — the ECHR Italian cluster, chronologically

  1. Lombardo v Italy, App. 25704/11 (ECtHR Second Section, 29 January 2013)
  2. Strumia v Italy, App. 53377/13 (ECtHR, 23 June 2016)
  3. Improta v Italy, App. 66396/14 (ECtHR First Section, 4 May 2017)

Australia

  1. Green & Green [2024] FedCFamC1F 896

Civil-law supreme courts

  1. BVerfG, 1 BvR 1076/23 (17 November 2023) — Germany.
  2. Cass. 1re civ., 26 juin 2013, n° 12-14.392 — France.
  3. STS 519/2017, Tribunal Supremo, Sala Primera, 22 September 2017 — Spain.
  4. Cass. civ. sez. I, ord. n. 9691/2022 — Italy.
  5. Cass. civ. sez. I, ord. n. 4595/2025 — Italy (cassates Bologna CdA, applies 9691/2022 line).

Criminal-law approach

  1. Hoge Raad, 15 februari 2005, ECLI:NL:HR:2005:AR8250 — Netherlands.

Statutory PA regimes

  1. STJ, REsp 1.859.228/SP (Rel. Min. Nancy Andrighi, 2024) — Brazil.
  2. STJ, REsp 2.108.750/GO (Terceira Turma, 2024) — Brazil.
  3. SCJN, Acción de Inconstitucionalidad 11/2016 — Oaxaca — Mexico.

Latin America

  1. CSJN, P.B., E.G. c/ B., K.E. s/ Medidas Precautorias (Argentina, 2021)

Eastern European doctrinal pivot

  1. Sąd Najwyższy, uchwała III CZP 20/25 (Poland, 3 October 2025)

Asia

  1. Vivek Singh v Romani Singh, (2017) 3 SCC 231 — Supreme Court of India.
  2. TEN v TEO and another appeal [2020] SGHCF 20 — Singapore High Court (Family Division), Debbie Ong J.
  3. H v W [2021] HKCA 733 — Hong Kong Court of Appeal.

Africa

  1. T.L.D v B.G [2023] ZAGPJHC 801 — Gauteng Local Division.

How these case studies are sourced

See CONTRIBUTING.md for the editorial standard. In short: primary sources only, verbatim quotation for load-bearing language, "not publicly confirmed" rather than guessing, working URLs on every citation.

How to use this section

For a quick orientation, start with Global Comparison Matrix — one page, all 18 jurisdictions, 8 doctrinal groups. Then read the case nearest your jurisdiction. Then read the cases bracketing it (the one before, the one after) to see where your jurisdiction sits on the doctrinal arc.

Honest gaps & wanted contributions

  • A clean US appellate reversal of a core PA finding — see the gap-documentation page
  • Japan post-reform SCJ case-law — joint-custody reform (Law No. 33/2024) takes effect April 2026; revisit in 2027
  • Joan Meier's case series follow-ups with cite-checkable case names
  • Belgian Cour de cassation / Hof van Cassatie family-law PA decisions
  • Italian first-instance and appellate cases applying 9691/2022 correctly (4595/2025 is a corrective; we need a positive-application case)
  • Hong Kong Court of First Instance family-division cases (we have the CA case)
  • Polish lower-court cases applying III CZP 20/25
  • Brazilian appellate-tribunal cases below STJ
  • Indian High Court decisions building on Vivek Singh
  • Mexican state-level cases following SCJN AI 11/2016
  • Argentine Cámaras Nacionales decisions building on the CSJN line
  • Cases that journalists are working on right now

Open a PR. See CONTRIBUTING.md for what we'll accept and reject.

— Catalogued by Alan Markson · AntiAlienate.com · CC BY 4.0