A-T (Children) [2008] EWCA Civ 652 (14 May 2008)

A-T (Children) [2008] EWCA Civ 652 (14 May 2008)

The judge's order was set aside because it contained unrealistic and unachievable directions that prolonged litigation and failed to provide the necessary stability for the mother and children. The Court of Appeal substituted a family assistance order and imposed a section 91(14) prohibition on the father for 12 months, finding this to be in the best interests of the children.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 652
Parties
Father/appellant: Fosso Taga; Mother/respondent: Sadatou Idowu
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Final Order of Principal Registry of the Family Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Child Contact, Domestic Violence, Parental Responsibility, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Family Assistance Order
Family Law Child Contact Domestic Violence Parental Responsibility Section 91(14) Children Act 1989 Family Assistance Order

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fosso Taga

Father/appellant

Sadatou Idowu

Mother/respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Final Order of Principal Registry of the Family Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in failing to make a final order regarding contact and instead made unrealistic or unachievable directions
  2. 2 Whether continued litigation was contrary to the interests of the children and the mother's health
  3. 3 Appropriateness of a section 91(14) order and family assistance order

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's order was set aside because it contained unrealistic and unachievable directions that prolonged litigation and failed to provide the necessary stability for the mother and children. The Court of Appeal substituted a family assistance order and imposed a section 91(14) prohibition on the father for 12 months, finding this to be in the best interests of the children.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Paragraphs 4 to 11 of the judge's order set aside
  • Family assistance order addressed to the Guardian, mother, and children (excluding father) for six months