Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Jonathan Rustin (instructed by Covent Garden Family Law) for the Applicant Simon Rowbotham (instructed by London Family Solicitor) for the Respondent Hearing date: 3 July 2024 ____________________
i) An interim parenting order (equivalent to a "lives with" order) in favour of F;
i) X is less emotionally mature than many boys his age; she thought perhaps 2 or 3 years younger. He perceives his mother as all good, and his father as all bad with no nuance and some of his reasons for appearing to dislike his father seemed a bit flimsy. He does not have the capacity to make decisions in his best interests.
ii) X misses some aspects of New Zealand, including his sister Z, his cousins, and friends he made. He does not express any desire to see F.
iii) He prefers his school and his life back in England. He had wanted to leave New Zealand with M. He has a "strong wish to remain in the UK" and does not want to go to New Zealand (a view also expressed in a short letter to the court).
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.