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.
On the handing down of the Court's judgment in this matter on 16 th November 2020 ( W v X (Family) [2020] JRC 240 ), in which the appellant's appeal and application to vary the periodic payments ordered by the Registrar were dismissed, Advocate Binnie applied for the respondent's costs on the standard basis.
Whilst acknowledging the general practice in proceedings relating to children to make no order as to costs, she submitted that there were exceptional circumstances arising out of the appellant's unreasonable conduct in this litigation which justified such an order. In summary, she submitted:
(i) He had consistently demonstrated a lack of respect for the Child since she was born and for these proceedings in his delay and evasion of orders. He had now brought two appeals, both of which have been unsuccessful and the respondent had endured stress and desperation for all of the Child's life.
(ii) The appellant's conduct had caused Advocate Binnie an inordinate amount of work, namely some 220 hours to date, or approximately £66,000.
(iii) The manner in which the appellant had run the litigation had resulted in his own legal costs exceeding what would be required to meet the Child's needs until she reached primary school age.
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.