R (A Child) (Costs)

R (A Child) (Costs)

Father’s conduct was unreasonable and misleading, justifying a costs order against him despite the usual rule of no order as to costs in child abduction cases.

Parties
Applicant: Father; Respondent: Mother
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Wardship Application / Judgment on Costs
Outcome
Costs order granted against Father
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Habitual Residence, Costs in Family Proceedings
Family Law Child Abduction Habitual Residence Costs in Family Proceedings

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Father

Applicant

Mother

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Wardship Application / Judgment on Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Father should pay the Mother’s costs due to unreasonable conduct
  2. 2 Whether the case was properly presented as child abduction
  3. 3 Whether the Father’s claims regarding habitual residence and abduction were misleading

Ratio Decidendi

Father’s conduct was unreasonable and misleading, justifying a costs order against him despite the usual rule of no order as to costs in child abduction cases.

Court Disposition

Costs order granted against Father

Orders

  • Father to pay £25,000 towards Mother’s costs