C v S

Represented by Mr Latham for the Appellant and Mr Herbert for the Respondent ____________________

The Judge erred and/or was wrong to conclude that the Respondent's conduct in the relevant proceedings had been "anything other than unreasonable and/or reprehensible".

The Judge was wrong to conclude that the Respondent's conduct was neither reprehensible or unreasonable on the basis that many litigants in family proceedings of this kind engage in conduct of a similar nature (ie lying in evidence, making false allegations etc).

The Judge erred in principle in her approach or was wrong to have considered it necessary that the Respondent's conduct be categorised as "exceptional" before any costs order should be made against her.

In all the circumstances, the Judge failed to give adequate weight to matters of importance and/or gave too much weight to matters which she ought not to have taken into account or ought to have attached significantly less weight to, such that she arrived at a decision which was outside the generous ambit of her discretion and/or was wrong.