The CA allowed the appeal of a husband against a judgment in favour of the Wife that Barder principles were engaged where the value of shares owned by him dramatically increased after a consent order settling the parties Ancillary Relief claims had been entered into. The CA held that Barder principles did not apply to the case where the Wife was aware that the value of the shares was likely to increase. The CA inter alia stated that I v I (Ancillary Relief: Disclosure) [2008] EWHC 1167(Fam); [20 ...
|
The CA granted permission to appeal and allowed an appeal against a case management decision in respect of Care proceedings taking place in the High Court. The CA overturned the refusal to permit the instruction of a paediatric pathologist to review a post mortem on a child. The court re-emphasised it's ability to act on a urgent basis where necessary and urged the profession to utilise this in cases which require an urgent response.
|
The CA considered the issue of disclosure to the police of concessions made within care proceedings as to the causation of severe head injuries to a child. The trial judge had refused the application of the Chief Constable for disclosure of the concession document and others. The CA allowed the appeal and remitted the matter to the County Court for further consideration on the grounds the Judge had not been referred to the revocation of Rule 4.23 of the FPR 1991 and its replacement by Rule 10.2 ...
|
The CA dismissed an appeal against the judgment of a circuit judge on an appeal from the FPC. The CA considered the issue of status quo versus parental care in a case where a child had resided with their maternal grandmother since birth and the Father was seeking a residence order. The FPC had refused the Father's application for residence. The CA upheld the decision of the circuit judge to grant a residence order to the Father. The CA also briefly considered the principles of second appeals whe ...
|
Appeal by Stated Case under section 51(11) (b) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995:- On 20 May 2008 the respondent referred the case of N M, born on 15 May 2008, to a Children's Hearing for Renfrewshire that in terms of section 52(2)(c) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 he was likely:- "(i) to suffer unnecessarily; or (ii) be impaired seriously in his health or development, due to a lack of parental care." On 28 November 2008, the sheriff, after hearing evidence, found the grounds of referral ...
|
The CA allowed in part the appeal of a Father against a fact finding judgment within care proceedings where findings had been made that he was the perpetrator of non-accidental injuries to both children and that the Mother could not be excluded as a perpetrator. The Father argued that the Mother should be found to be sole perpetrator of the injuries. Both parents sought a re-trial. The LA and GAL argued that neither parent could be excluded as a perpetrator. The CA substituted its own judgment a ...
|
The court considered the question of costs orders and the enforceability of these arising out inter-related chancery division and ancillary relief proceedings. Ruling that a husband should pay the wife's costs of ancillary relief proceedings, the wife should pay 90% of the costs of 'the company' in Chancery proceedings and that the wife was entitled to a Bullock order allowing her to recover these costs from the husband.
|
A father's appeal against the order that he pay £20,000 towards a mother's costs of appeal was dismissed. The court considered the principles of costs in children act cases in giving the reasons for the refusal of the appeal.
|
In this action the pursuer sought decree of divorce and various orders including financial conclusions from the first defender including a capital sum of £20 million and interdict and interdict ad interim in relation to the first defender and the second defenders. On 24 February 2009 interim interdict in relation to the second defenders was granted in the following terms:- "... ad interim interdicts the Second Defender, Wards Estate Trustees Limited, by themselves, their agents or servants, ...
|
Matrimonial - Proof:- The parties married on 22 July 1977 and had a child during the course of that marriage who is now over the age of 16. The parties separated on 20 August 2002 and have remained apart since that date. Decree of divorce was pronounced following evidence that their marriage had broken down irretrievably. Here the defender sought a claim for financial provision of £3,988,515.00 with interest from 30 August 2002 until payment. During the period of the marriage the pursuer wa ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |