A (children), Re

A (children), Re

The judge was entitled to exclude historical allegations of domestic violence in accordance with previous court directions, and to order unsupervised contact based on his assessment of the parties, the evidence, and the welfare of the children. There was no procedural unfairness or error in the exercise of discretion.

Parties
Appellant: Mother; Respondent: Father
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Family Law Children / Application for Permission to Appeal (with Appeal to Follow If Granted)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Contact Orders, Domestic Violence, Procedural Fairness, Exercise of Judicial Discretion
Family Law Child Contact Contact Orders Domestic Violence Procedural Fairness Exercise of Judicial Discretion

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mother

Appellant

Father

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Children / Application for Permission to Appeal (with Appeal to Follow If Granted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in refusing to investigate historical allegations of domestic violence before ordering unsupervised contact
  2. 2 Whether the hearing was procedurally unfair by excluding pre-2004 evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge properly exercised discretion in making the contact order

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to exclude historical allegations of domestic violence in accordance with previous court directions, and to order unsupervised contact based on his assessment of the parties, the evidence, and the welfare of the children. There was no procedural unfairness or error in the exercise of discretion.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal is refused