AB v CD & Anor

AB v CD & Anor

The judge found that EF was suffering and likely to suffer significant emotional harm in the mother's care due to her refusal to accept previous findings and her manipulation of EF's views about her father. The judge was satisfied that the transfer of residence, with appropriate safeguards for EF's diabetes, was in her best interests. The appellate court held that the trial judge was entitled to reach this decision and there was no error justifying interference.

Parties
Appellant / Mother: AB; First Respondent / Father: CD; Second Respondent / Child (by Guardian): EF (by her Rule 16.4 Guardian Alexa Munday)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Final Welfare Order (transfer of Residence)
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted; appeal dismissed; stay of removal order extended until 3pm the following day; postscript notes Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal.
Legal Topics
Transfer of Residence, Welfare of the Child, Contact Orders, Fact Finding Hearings, Parental Alienation, Medical Needs of Child
Family Law Children Law Transfer of Residence Welfare of the Child Contact Orders Fact Finding Hearings Parental Alienation Medical Needs of Child

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Appellant / Mother

CD

First Respondent / Father

EF (by her Rule 16.4 Guardian Alexa Munday)

Second Respondent / Child (by Guardian)

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Appeal From Final Welfare Order (transfer of Residence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in ordering transfer of residence of EF from mother to father
  2. 2 Whether the welfare of EF, particularly in light of her diabetes, was properly considered
  3. 3 Whether the mother's criticisms of the process and findings have merit

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found that EF was suffering and likely to suffer significant emotional harm in the mother's care due to her refusal to accept previous findings and her manipulation of EF's views about her father. The judge was satisfied that the transfer of residence, with appropriate safeguards for EF's diabetes, was in her best interests. The appellate court held that the trial judge was entitled to reach this decision and there was no error justifying interference.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted; appeal dismissed; stay of removal order extended until 3pm the following day; postscript notes Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal.

Orders

  • Daily updates on EF's welfare and glucose levels to be provided to the mother (except Sundays) via social workers.
  • Father's wife (G) and paternal grandparents to confirm in writing their diabetes care training.