Wilmot v Wilmot

Wilmot v Wilmot

The new evidence relied upon by Mr Wilmot is not credible or weighty; the school letter was based on his own assertions and the birth certificate evidence is contradicted by Ms Maughan's evidence. No substantive order was made regarding DNA testing. The applications for permission to appeal are totally without merit and are dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Mr Wilmot; Respondent: Ms Maughan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Family / Permission to Appeal Applications
Outcome
applications for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Divorce, Ancillary Relief, Fraud, Non Disclosure, Paternity, Admission of New Evidence, Consent Orders, Enforcement of Financial Orders
Family Law Divorce Ancillary Relief Fraud Non Disclosure Paternity Admission of New Evidence Consent Orders +1 more

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

Mr Wilmot

Applicant

Ms Maughan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family / Permission to Appeal Applications

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted against the 2007 consent order and the 2001 ancillary relief order based on alleged fraud and new evidence
  2. 2 Whether new evidence regarding paternity and children's residence is credible and admissible
  3. 3 Whether enforcement orders should be stayed pending appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The new evidence relied upon by Mr Wilmot is not credible or weighty; the school letter was based on his own assertions and the birth certificate evidence is contradicted by Ms Maughan's evidence. No substantive order was made regarding DNA testing. The applications for permission to appeal are totally without merit and are dismissed.

Court Disposition

applications for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Applications for permission to appeal in cases 146, 147, and 1551 dismissed
  • Ms Maughan's evidence admitted