M (A Child), Re

M (A Child), Re

The judge at first instance had a broad discretion to award costs on appeal, and given the father's decision to oppose the appeal in full despite clear procedural failings at first instance, the costs order was within the proper exercise of judicial discretion. There was no reasonable prospect of success in the appeal against the costs order.

Parties
Appellant: EM; Respondent: SW
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal (private Law Children Act 1989) / Application for Permission to Appeal (costs Order)
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Costs in Children Proceedings, Appeals, Judicial Discretion, Litigation Conduct
Family Law Civil Procedure Costs in Children Proceedings Appeals Judicial Discretion Litigation Conduct

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EM

Appellant

SW

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (private Law Children Act 1989) / Application for Permission to Appeal (costs Order)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in awarding costs against the father in a children proceedings appeal
  2. 2 Whether the principles for awarding costs in children cases were properly applied on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The judge at first instance had a broad discretion to award costs on appeal, and given the father's decision to oppose the appeal in full despite clear procedural failings at first instance, the costs order was within the proper exercise of judicial discretion. There was no reasonable prospect of success in the appeal against the costs order.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal against the costs order is refused