Re B (Children)

Re B (Children)

The order for indemnity costs was set aside because it was based on the erroneous assumption that the mother had not participated in the proceedings, when in fact she had communicated with the court and provided a medical certificate. The judge's failure to appreciate this material led to an unjustified costs order.

Parties
Appellant: Mrs H; Respondent: Mr H
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed. No order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Costs in Family Proceedings, Indemnity Costs, Children Act Applications, Litigant in Person
Family Law Civil Procedure Costs in Family Proceedings Indemnity Costs Children Act Applications Litigant in Person

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 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs H

Appellant

Mr H

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the order for indemnity costs against the mother was justified in Children Act proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in concluding the mother had not participated in the proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The order for indemnity costs was set aside because it was based on the erroneous assumption that the mother had not participated in the proceedings, when in fact she had communicated with the court and provided a medical certificate. The judge's failure to appreciate this material led to an unjustified costs order.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed