MFS (Appeal: Transfer of Primary Care)

MFS (Appeal: Transfer of Primary Care)

The criticisms of Dr Willemsen’s report were not made out; his evidence was reliable and consistent with the broader evidential picture. The change of primary carer was supported by overwhelming expert and professional evidence and was proportionate. The delay in appealing was serious and unjustified; the appeal lacked merit and permission to appeal and extension of time were refused.

Parties
Applicant: PP; 1st Respondent: MS; 2nd Respondent: MFS; 1st Interested Party: Essex County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Family Appeal / Judgment on Permission to Appeal and Extension of Time
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal and extension of time refused.
Legal Topics
Child Residence, Parental Alienation, Expert Evidence, Procedural Irregularity, Proportionality, Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure
Family Law Child Residence Parental Alienation Expert Evidence Procedural Irregularity Proportionality Extension of Time Appeal Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PP

Applicant

MS

1st Respondent

MFS

2nd Respondent

Essex County Council

1st Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Family Appeal / Judgment on Permission to Appeal and Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the influential report of Dr Willemsen constituted a serious procedural irregularity
  2. 2 Whether the immediate removal of the child from the primary carer was disproportionate and wrong
  3. 3 Whether an extension of time to appeal should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

The criticisms of Dr Willemsen’s report were not made out; his evidence was reliable and consistent with the broader evidential picture. The change of primary carer was supported by overwhelming expert and professional evidence and was proportionate. The delay in appealing was serious and unjustified; the appeal lacked merit and permission to appeal and extension of time were refused.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to appeal and extension of time refused.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused.
  • Extension of time to appeal refused.