McD. -v- L. [2007] IESC 28 (19 July 2007)

McD. -v- L. [2007] IESC 28 (19 July 2007)

The Supreme Court (majority) affirmed the High Court's interlocutory orders, holding that the welfare of the infant is the paramount consideration and, in the absence of expert evidence, the balance of convenience lay in maintaining the status quo and keeping the child within the jurisdiction pending the substantive hearing. The applicant's right is limited to applying for guardianship and access, not to be presumed as a substantive right at this stage.

Citation
[2007] IESC 28
Parties
Applicant/respondent: J. McD.; Respondent/appellant: P. L.; Respondent/appellant: B. M.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal (interlocutory) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (by majority); High Court interlocutory orders affirmed; matter remitted to High Court for substantive hearing
Legal Topics
Guardianship, Access to Child, Sperm Donation, Same Sex Parenting, Relocation of Child, Interlocutory Injunction, Welfare of the Child
Family Law Child Law Constitutional Law Guardianship Access to Child Sperm Donation Same Sex Parenting Relocation of Child +2 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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J. McD.

Applicant/respondent

P. L.

Respondent/appellant

B. M.

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (interlocutory) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Interlocutory Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interlocutory injunction should restrain the removal of the infant from the State pending the hearing of the application for guardianship and access
  2. 2 Whether the appointment of an assessor under s.47 of the Family Law Act, 1995 was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court (majority) affirmed the High Court's interlocutory orders, holding that the welfare of the infant is the paramount consideration and, in the absence of expert evidence, the balance of convenience lay in maintaining the status quo and keeping the child within the jurisdiction pending the substantive hearing. The applicant's right is limited to applying for guardianship and access, not to be presumed as a substantive right at this stage.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (by majority); High Court interlocutory orders affirmed; matter remitted to High Court for substantive hearing

Orders

  • Infant not to be removed from the jurisdiction pending determination of proceedings (save for specified period)
  • Appointment of assessor under s.47 Family Law Act, 1995 affirmed