The court made the decree nisi absolute, despite unresolved ancillary relief and maintenance issues, after finding the child’s welfare arrangements were the best practicable.
The court varied a child-arrangements order, kept joint custody, granted care and control of both children to the father, and set defined access and holiday sharing for the mother.
The Family Court refused to vary a 2023 custody and access order, finding no material change of circumstances and giving weight to the child’s wishes and social welfare reports.
The court granted joint custody to both parents, care and control to the Father, and defined access to the Mother after finding that stability best served the children’s welfare.
The court granted the mother sole care and control of two young sons, with the father receiving structured staying access, video access, and information-sharing rights.
The Court of Appeal dismissed a renewed application for leave to appeal out of time against an interim child-access order, finding no reasonable prospect of success.
The court granted the mother sole custody and sole care and control, allowed limited supervised centre-based access and video contact, and continued protective orders.
Given the child's settled and stable care with the father’s family, the mother's persistent non‑cooperation with social welfare and failure to produce ordered psychiatric evidence, and the child's expressed wish to remain in current arrangements, the court concluded the child's best interests are met by awarding the father sole custody, limiting maternal access to supervised/digital contact only and refusing overnight or removal permissions until satisfactory medical evidence is produced.
The court varied a costs order nisi in a child relocation dispute, finding the father’s litigation conduct justified a departure from the usual no-costs approach.
The court ordered shared care of the child during term time, with the child in the father’s care from Thursday evening to Sunday morning and in the mother’s care otherwise.