Pengelly v Enright-Redding [2005] EWCA Civ 1639 (09 November 2005)

Pengelly v Enright-Redding [2005] EWCA Civ 1639 (09 November 2005)

The Court of Appeal held that a shared residence order was appropriate as it reflected the reality of Megan's living arrangements, with time divided nearly equally between both parents, both of whom had demonstrated responsibility. The judge below had not provided sufficient reasons for refusing the order, and there was no evidence that granting it would harm Megan's welfare. The appeal was allowed to the extent of substituting a shared residence order for the previous residence order.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1639
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Brian David Pengelly; Respondent/respondent: Amanda Julie Enright-Redding
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Exeter County Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Shared Residence Orders, Parental Responsibility, Child Welfare, Judicial Discretion, Contact Arrangements
Family Law Shared Residence Orders Parental Responsibility Child Welfare Judicial Discretion Contact Arrangements

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

Parties

Brian David Pengelly

Applicant/appellant

Amanda Julie Enright-Redding

Respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Exeter County Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a shared residence order should be made for the child Megan
  2. 2 Whether the father's share of time with Megan should be increased

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that a shared residence order was appropriate as it reflected the reality of Megan's living arrangements, with time divided nearly equally between both parents, both of whom had demonstrated responsibility. The judge below had not provided sufficient reasons for refusing the order, and there was no evidence that granting it would harm Megan's welfare. The appeal was allowed to the extent of substituting a shared residence order for the previous residence order.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Substitution of a shared residence order for the previous residence order of 19 December 2002
  • Encouragement and facilitation of mediation between the parties