JABBAR & GADE

The appeal, brought by the mother (the appellant), concerns decisions made in family law proceedings involving parenting and property matters, as well as an application for a stay of final orders. The mother appealed against the findings of the primary judge, who had made orders concerning the children's residence and contact with her, as well as the distribution of property between the parties. The primary judge had also refused to grant a stay of the final orders. The mother argued that the primary judge had erred in assessing evidence relating to the risk of harm she posed to the children, the admissibility of certain evidence, and the exercise of discretion in making property settlement orders. The father (the respondent) and the Independent Children's Lawyer sought costs against the mother.

The legal issues before the court included whether the primary judge erred in accepting certain evidence as authentic, whether the primary judge properly exercised discretion in making property settlement orders, and whether the primary judge should have considered whether the father or paternal grandmother were in contempt of court. The court also needed to determine if the mother's appeal was futile and if the costs sought by the respondent and the Independent Children's Lawyer were justified.

The court found that the findings made by the primary judge in accepting video footage and text messages as authentic were open on the evidence. The court held that the primary judge was correct to reject the mother's assertion that the video footage was inadmissible because the recording device had not been produced for forensic examination. The court found that the video footage was relevant and probative. The court also found that no occasion arose for the primary judge to consider whether the father or paternal grandmother were in contempt of court. The court held that the primary judge correctly exercised discretion in making property settlement orders, and the mother's appeal in this regard lacked merit. The court held that the appeal from the refusal to grant a stay of the final orders was futile. Finally, the court held that the mother and the father should bear their own costs, but the mother was ordered to pay the Independent Children's Lawyer's costs in a fixed amount.

The orders made by the court dismissed both appeals and directed the mother to pay the Independent Children's Lawyer's costs in a fixed amount of $4,686, while the mother and the father were to bear their own costs.