W v M

W v M

The application to adduce new evidence was refused as the evidence was not new, not credible, and would not have influenced the outcome. Permission to appeal was refused as none of the grounds had a real prospect of success; the lower court's judgment was thorough, child-focused, and properly reasoned. A section 91(14) order was imposed to protect the child from further harm caused by litigation. Costs were awarded against the father due to unreasonable litigation conduct in pursuing a wholly unmeritorious appeal.

Parties
Applicant Father: MR W; Respondent Mother: MS M; Child: G (child, by Guardian)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Family Appeal / Judgment on Permission to Appeal and Costs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused; application to adduce new evidence refused; section 91(14) order imposed; costs awarded against applicant.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Appeal Procedure, Section 91(14) Order, Costs in Family Proceedings, Welfare Checklist, School Refusal, Parental Conflict
Family Law Child Arrangements Appeal Procedure Section 91(14) Order Costs in Family Proceedings Welfare Checklist School Refusal Parental Conflict

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 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MR W

Applicant Father

MS M

Respondent Mother

G (child, by Guardian)

Child

Procedural Posture

Family Appeal / Judgment on Permission to Appeal and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence should be admitted on appeal
  2. 2 Whether permission to appeal should be granted against child arrangements order
  3. 3 Whether a section 91(14) order should be imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The application to adduce new evidence was refused as the evidence was not new, not credible, and would not have influenced the outcome. Permission to appeal was refused as none of the grounds had a real prospect of success; the lower court's judgment was thorough, child-focused, and properly reasoned. A section 91(14) order was imposed to protect the child from further harm caused by litigation. Costs were awarded against the father due to unreasonable litigation conduct in pursuing a wholly unmeritorious appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal refused; application to adduce new evidence refused; section 91(14) order imposed; costs awarded against applicant.

Orders

  • Application to adduce new evidence refused
  • Permission to appeal refused