RYCROFT & HAMLETT (No.2)

The applicants, Rycroft and Hamlett, sought a stay of orders made by the Family Court pending their appeal. The dispute concerned the relocation of a child, with the mother having already relocated the child. The application for a stay was heard by Egan J.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether to grant a stay of the existing orders, which would effectively require the child to be relocated again. This required the court to consider the applicants' prospects of success on appeal, the risk of injustice if the stay was refused, and the balance of convenience.

Egan J noted the significant delay in the filing of the notice of appeal. Furthermore, the court found that a further relocation of the child would be disruptive, particularly as the child had already commenced schooling in the mother's location. The balance of convenience was found to favour the mother's relocation remaining undisturbed, as the disruption to the child's life would be substantial if the stay were granted.

Consequently, the application for a stay of the orders was dismissed.