F (Children) , Re [2005] EWCA Civ 1571 (08 November 2005)

F (Children) , Re [2005] EWCA Civ 1571 (08 November 2005)

The judge's orders on residence and indirect contact were within his discretion, supported by expert evidence and the children's wishes. The section 91(14) order barring applications for two years may be arguable as excessive and will be listed for permission to appeal. The financial orders regarding sale of the home and division of proceeds require further consideration on appeal from the Deputy District Judge's order.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1571
Parties
Applicant Father: Mr LTF; Respondent Mother: LMF
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Permission to Appeal Applications From High Court and Deputy District Judge Orders
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused on residence and contact orders; permission to appeal on section 91(14) adjourned pending outcome of financial appeal; application for permission to appeal financial orders adjourned with liberty to restore.
Legal Topics
Residence Orders, Contact Orders, Section 91(14) Children Act 1989, Ancillary Relief, Sale of Matrimonial Home
Family Law Residence Orders Contact Orders Section 91(14) Children Act 1989 Ancillary Relief Sale of Matrimonial Home

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr LTF

Applicant Father

LMF

Respondent Mother

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Permission to Appeal Applications From High Court and Deputy District Judge Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the residence and contact orders made by Judge Walford were correct
  2. 2 Whether the section 91(14) order barring applications for two years was a proper exercise of discretion
  3. 3 Whether the sale of the former matrimonial home to the local authority at undervalue was appropriate and whether the division of proceeds was fair

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's orders on residence and indirect contact were within his discretion, supported by expert evidence and the children's wishes. The section 91(14) order barring applications for two years may be arguable as excessive and will be listed for permission to appeal. The financial orders regarding sale of the home and division of proceeds require further consideration on appeal from the Deputy District Judge's order.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused on residence and contact orders; permission to appeal on section 91(14) adjourned pending outcome of financial appeal; application for permission to appeal financial orders adjourned with liberty to restore.

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal Judge Compston's directions order dismissed.
  • Application for permission to appeal Judge Ryland's disclosure order refused.