J v E (No2)(Case Management)

J v E (No2)(Case Management)

The mother demonstrated she could not reasonably obtain legal representation without a costs allowance due to disputes over asset ownership, lack of income, and failed attempts to secure third-party funding. The father's application for a costs order was refused as the mother's conduct was not unreasonable or reprehensible; the issues litigated were arguable and required judicial determination. Amendments to the case management timetable were necessary due to delays in obtaining evidence from Zambia.

Parties
Applicant: J; Respondent: E
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Family / Interlocutory Judgment on Costs Allowance, Case Management, and Costs Order Applications
Outcome
Mother's application for a costs allowance granted; father's application for costs order refused; case management directions amended.
Legal Topics
Child Arrangements, Relocation of Child, Financial Provision for Child, Costs Allowance, Case Management, Costs Orders
Family Law Child Arrangements Relocation of Child Financial Provision for Child Costs Allowance Case Management Costs Orders

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 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 21
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J

Applicant

E

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Interlocutory Judgment on Costs Allowance, Case Management, and Costs Order Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the mother should be granted a costs allowance to fund her legal fees
  2. 2 Whether the case management timetable should be amended
  3. 3 Whether the mother should pay the father's costs since the Court of Appeal decision

Ratio Decidendi

The mother demonstrated she could not reasonably obtain legal representation without a costs allowance due to disputes over asset ownership, lack of income, and failed attempts to secure third-party funding. The father's application for a costs order was refused as the mother's conduct was not unreasonable or reprehensible; the issues litigated were arguable and required judicial determination. Amendments to the case management timetable were necessary due to delays in obtaining evidence from Zambia.

Court Disposition

Mother's application for a costs allowance granted; father's application for costs order refused; case management directions amended.

Orders

  • Costs allowance of £113,352 (including VAT) awarded to the mother to cover outstanding and future legal costs, to be repaid if so ordered at conclusion.
  • No order as to the father's costs of proceedings since the Court of Appeal judgment dated 12 June 2023.