B (A Child), Re

B (A Child), Re

There was no procedural irregularity sufficient to justify permission to appeal; the reasons for allowing the appeal were given orally before the rehearing, and the judge's decision was within her discretion and supported by evidence. No important point of principle or compelling reason was identified.

Parties
Appellant: B; Respondent: W
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Family Law Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Relocation of Child, Residence Orders, Appeals Procedure, Shared Residence, Best Interests of the Child
Family Law Civil Procedure Relocation of Child Residence Orders Appeals Procedure Shared Residence Best Interests of the 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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B

Appellant

W

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal (second Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted for a second appeal regarding relocation and residence orders
  2. 2 Whether procedural irregularity in delayed reasons for judgment justifies appeal
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in allowing the appeal from the Family Proceedings Court

Ratio Decidendi

There was no procedural irregularity sufficient to justify permission to appeal; the reasons for allowing the appeal were given orally before the rehearing, and the judge's decision was within her discretion and supported by evidence. No important point of principle or compelling reason was identified.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal the order of 3 June 2013 refused
  • Permission to appeal the order of 28 October 2013 refused