L.T -v- J.T [2012] IEHC 588 (14 December 2012)

L.T -v- J.T [2012] IEHC 588 (14 December 2012)

The High Court retains discretion to accept jurisdiction to re-enter and vary its own custody and access orders where liberty to apply has been granted and issues remain outstanding, but the appointment of a guardian ad litem is not appropriate in this case as the statutory provision is not commenced and the matter is better suited to the court of first instance.

Citation
[2012] IEHC 588
Parties
Applicant: L. T.; Respondent: J. T.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
14 December 2012
Procedural Posture
Circuit Appeal (family Law) / Post Judgment Motion to Re Enter and Vary Custody/access Orders
Outcome
Application to re-enter and vary custody/access orders allowed; application to appoint guardian ad litem refused.
Legal Topics
Judicial Separation, Custody and Access, Guardianship of Infants, Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem, Jurisdiction on Appeal
Family Law Judicial Separation Custody and Access Guardianship of Infants Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem Jurisdiction on Appeal

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

L. T.

Applicant

J. T.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Circuit Appeal (family Law) / Post Judgment Motion to Re Enter and Vary Custody/access Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to hear a motion to vary custody and access orders made on appeal from the Circuit Court
  2. 2 Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to appoint a guardian ad litem for the child
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to accept or decline jurisdiction in this context

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court retains discretion to accept jurisdiction to re-enter and vary its own custody and access orders where liberty to apply has been granted and issues remain outstanding, but the appointment of a guardian ad litem is not appropriate in this case as the statutory provision is not commenced and the matter is better suited to the court of first instance.

Court Disposition

Application to re-enter and vary custody/access orders allowed; application to appoint guardian ad litem refused.

Orders

  • Matter formally re-entered for further consideration of custody and access issues as set out in the motion.
  • Application to substitute midweek access with further weekend access to be heard.