Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
View all articles
Authors

CONTACT/ RESIDENCE: AA v NA and Kab [2010] EWHC 1282

Sep 29, 2018, 17:58 PM
Slug : contact-residence-aa-v-na-and-kab-2010-ewhc-1282
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Jun 22, 2010, 10:05 AM
Article ID : 91101

(Family Division; Mostyn J; 10 June 2010)

Appeal against a fact-finding decision. Over the 17 day hearing there were 89 allegations in issue including assault on the mother and physical abuse of children. The judge found for the mother on every point and proceeded to make an interim shared residence order. The appellate court would only be able to conclude that a fact-finder had got the wrong answer if (i) the conclusion was demonstrably contrary to the weight of evidence; or (ii) the decision-making process was identified as plainly defective, so that it could be said that the findings in question were unsafe.

With hindsight the whole exercise was completely futile, but the court couldn't overturn the decision on that basis only. The balance of probability was slightly misstated by the judge who had also made very adverse findings against the father based on some litigation misconduct by the father. The litigation misconduct did not necessarily demonstrate an intrinsic mendacity on the primary issue. The judge had failed to take account of the various points on which the mother had changed her account. The whole judgment was rendered unsafe and should be set aside. Should not be a further fact-finding hearing as equal shared care had already been agreed.

__________________________________________________________________

Family Law Reports

Family Law Reports are relied upon by the judiciary, barristers and solicitors and the reports are cited daily in court and in judgments.

They contain verbatim case reports of every important Family Division, Court of Appeal, House of Lords and European courts case, and also includes practice directions, covering the whole range of family law, public and private child law.

 

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from