Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
A day in the life Of...
Edward Bennett
Edward Bennett
Read on
FINANCIAL REMEDIES: KS v ND (Schedule 1: Appeal: Costs) [2013] EWHC 464 (Fam)
Date:19 MAR 2013
Law Reporter

(Family Division, Mostyn J, 12 March 2013)

In proceedings to vary a Sch 1 order the judge capped the father' liability for school fees for the 17-year-old son at a rate below the actual amount, resisted the mother's application for a further lump sum and made no order as to costs. The mother succeeded in extending the provision of child support to cover tertiary education. The mother was granted permission to appeal the decision on school fees and costs.

The school fees decision left an annual shortfall of £7,500 but on the figures available to the district judge the mother would be able to meet it. The submission that the judge left the mother with an unfunded requirement of £8,000 was not made out and the appeal in relation to school fees was dismissed.

Objective analysis of the proceedings suggested that overall the father was more successful than the mother. Despite the fact that the father's litigation conduct was called into question it had no direct causal connection with the later generation of costs

The mother and father's costs stood at £125,000, both parents were in disastrous financial positions and the cost consequences for both would be calamitous. The mother's argument on economic argument was not made out.

The mother's appeal against costs was dismissed.