1 Apr 2015
The appeal was dismissed and the court directed that day-to-day care transfer from Mr and Mrs P to Ms O effective 11 April 2015, with specified interim contact and transition arrangements (including delivery of the child and belongings at Ms O's address and limiting parental entry), and refused immediate permission for overseas travel over Easter while leaving open future travel by agreement or court order.
19 Feb 2015
The appeal was meritorious and pursued for the child's long‑term benefit; there was no basis to penalise the appellant under r14.6 or to reduce respondent's costs for lengthy submissions; consequently costs should lie where they fall and no order for costs is made.
5 Nov 2013
Appeal allowed: Family Court erred by deciding costs without ensuring appellant had opportunity to be heard on an out‑of‑time memorandum and by framing the welfare inquiry incorrectly (focusing on dismissal impact rather than impact of costs on child's welfare); accordingly the costs order was set aside and no costs awarded for the strike out application.
24 Aug 2011
The appeal is dismissed. The High Court upheld the Family Court's decision that the mother is better placed to provide day-to-day care given her greater availability, capacity to respond to the child's medical condition and approach to adolescence, and ability to support extracurricular interests; the judge lawfully weighed s5 principles, the child's wishes, the s133 report and status quo and was not shown to be wrong. Further evidence tendered on appeal was inadmissible without leave and the respondent's application to discharge the costs order on the stay was dismissed; costs on appeal awar…