M (Children), Re

M (Children), Re

The trial judge’s findings were based on a careful analysis of the evidence, including credibility assessments of both parties. The judge’s conclusions were within the ambit of reasonable disagreement and were not plainly wrong. The appellate court will not interfere with findings of fact unless they are unsupported by evidence or are plainly wrong, which was not the case here.

Parties
Applicant: Ms M; Respondent: Mr M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal Private Law Children Proceedings / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Children Act 1989, Fact Finding Hearing, Appeal, Credibility Assessment
Family Law Children Act 1989 Fact Finding Hearing Appeal Credibility Assessment

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms M

Applicant

Mr M

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Private Law Children Proceedings / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's findings of fact were plainly wrong and unsupported by evidence
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to properly assess credibility and inconsistencies in the evidence
  3. 3 Whether the appellate court should interfere with the trial judge’s findings

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge’s findings were based on a careful analysis of the evidence, including credibility assessments of both parties. The judge’s conclusions were within the ambit of reasonable disagreement and were not plainly wrong. The appellate court will not interfere with findings of fact unless they are unsupported by evidence or are plainly wrong, which was not the case here.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The judge’s findings of fact stand
  • Appeal is dismissed