The father sought to appeal an order with respect to contact with his children, alleging ‘that the reasons he is not having contact with his children are a combination of maternal deceit, the deliberate alienation of the children from him by their mother, and a gullible and corrupt family justice system which has dishonestly and deliberately taken the mother’s part. ‘
Held: It was the father’s own attitude and hatred of the mother which made it unsafe to allow unspuervised contact. Both the mother and court desired contact, but the father rejected the idea of supervised contact. At this hearing the court could not make the orders sought by the father. It could decide only whether he was to be given leave to appeal. The history of litigation had been very extensive, and the father had made threats of violence to the court, and had been ready to disobey court orders. It was demonstrably clear that the father had not been denied access to the papers. A previous injustice in an order had been corrected by the court on a previous occasion, and had no continuing significance. The father had suffered a violent assault and head injury after which he had himself been violent, but appeared not to be ready to be assessed, and: ‘when things are not going his way, GW is plainly incapable of controlling himself. He is consumed with hatred for his former wife, and we have little doubt that McFarlane J was right to be concerned that, left alone with the children, he would demonstrate clearly to them his feelings about her. ‘ The applications were refused.
Judges:
Wall LJ, Bennett J
Citations:
[2007] EWCA Civ 786, Times 02-Aug-2007
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Clarke-Hunt v Newcombe CA 1982
Cumming-Bruce LJ discussed the difficulty faced by an appeal court: ‘There was not really a right solution: there were two alternative wrong solutions. The problem for the judge was to appreciate the factors pointing in each direction and to decide . .
Cited – Re Bradford (a Child); Re O’Connell (Children) CA 25-Aug-2006
Without notice oral applications for permission to appeal made by litigants in person are not the stuff of which reserved judgments, law reports or publicity in the media are made. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Re F and H (Children) CA 24-Aug-2007
The father sought leave to appeal a care order and an order releasing his child for adoption.
Held: The court applied Re W as to the extent of the duty of the appellate court in such matters. The appeal would stand no reasonable prospect of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Children
Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258402
