[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> R (A Child), Re [2000] EWCA Civ 406 (27 November 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2000/406.html Cite as: [2000] EWCA Civ 406

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM SHEFFIELD COUNTY COURT
(HIS HONOUR JUDGE BARTFIELD)

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2 Monday, 27th November 2000

Monday, 27th November 2000

1. LORD JUSTICE WARD: This matter came before me this morning as the father's application for permission to appeal the orders made by His Honour Judge Bartfield on 4th August 2000 when he rejected the father's application that their son J should live with him. The judge also made an order that the father should not be entitled to make any application for a residence order for two years.
2. In the course of his submissions Mr R indicated to me that great progress has been made, as the judge hoped it would be made, to establish a happy relationship between the parents particularly at times of hand over. The parents have been talking very constructively, indeed, so that for example they have agreed to the always difficult question of Christmas access. It was a matter that the judge referred to in his judgment. The judge expressed a degree of optimism that they might agree those matters without resort to the court.
3. I am happy to say they have done so in a very sensible way that father respects the arrangements mother has made for Christmas Day but he will meet up with J later on that day, spend part of Christmas day itself with the boy and having him for Boxing Day. That is just one example of the huge strides that the parents have made to containing sensibly the difficulties they have had in the past. The contact which was agreed has also been extended voluntarily by the mother and now works very satisfactorily indeed.
4. As a result of the frank and useful discussion I have been able to have with Mr R, he sees the sense of that part of the judgment which was designed to provide a period of calm and a period when things could settle. Mr R has, very responsibly, withdrawn his application for permission to appeal.
5. I give this short judgment so that there may be a record of the fact that he has in this court behaved very responsibly indeed. He has shown to me quite clearly, as he showed the judge below, his love for his son and his anxiety to do what is best for him, but he has seen that a period of calm is what is best for J at the moment. He has also seen that more progress is made by co-operation with the mother than by striving through the courts. I hope she will also recognise the great strides that have been made and will recognise that father is now giving her a sense of some confidence that together they can cope with the difficulties in J's life and do what is best for him. I hope that co-operation will continue. If it does, it will work to J's best interest, and that is what we are all striving to achieve.
6. I therefore approve the withdrawal of the application for permission. I wish both parents and J better fortune as they come up to Christmas and the New Year.
(Application for permission to appeal withdrawn)