W v J [2024] EWFC 351 (B) (24 April 2024)

W v J [2024] EWFC 351 (B) (24 April 2024)

Permission to appeal is granted on grounds one and five because there is a realistic prospect of success that the final order failed to adequately assess and address the risk to the mother and child as required by Practice Direction 12J, and did not sufficiently consider whether the order was in the best interests of the child given unresolved risk assessments. Permission is refused on other grounds as the judge's case management decisions and weighing of evidence were within discretion and not procedurally unfair.

Citation
[2024] EWFC 351 (B)
Parties
Appellant Mother: W; Respondent Father: J
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 April 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Child Arrangements/appeal / Permission to Appeal Hearing
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted in part
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements Order, Appeal Procedure, Domestic Abuse, Risk Assessment, Practice Direction 12 J, Case Management
Family Law Child Arrangements Order Appeal Procedure Domestic Abuse Risk Assessment Practice Direction 12 J Case Management

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W

Appellant Mother

J

Respondent Father

Procedural Posture

Family Law Child Arrangements/appeal / Permission to Appeal Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the final child arrangements order adequately addressed the risk of harm to the mother and child under Practice Direction 12J
  2. 2 Whether the court gave undue weight to Cafcass recommendations
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness was denied by not allowing oral evidence or cross-examination

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted on grounds one and five because there is a realistic prospect of success that the final order failed to adequately assess and address the risk to the mother and child as required by Practice Direction 12J, and did not sufficiently consider whether the order was in the best interests of the child given unresolved risk assessments. Permission is refused on other grounds as the judge's case management decisions and weighing of evidence were within discretion and not procedurally unfair.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted in part

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted on grounds one and five
  • Permission to appeal refused on grounds two, three, and four