Stewart & Stewart

In the case of Stewart & Stewart, the mother appealed against the decision of the Family Court concerning the school arrangements for the children. The mother sought orders regarding the school the children would attend, but her application did not address who would bear the financial burden of the costs associated with the chosen school. The parents had previously agreed on equal shared parental responsibility for the children and other care arrangements. The mother argued that the trial judge did not follow the legislative pathway, misapprehended her case, and failed to provide adequate reasons for the decision. The father, who is a solicitor, also sought his costs of and incidental to the appeal.

The court examined whether the mother demonstrated that the parents could afford the costs of the proposed school. The mother did not provide evidence to show that the parents could meet the financial obligations of the chosen school. The court concluded that the trial judge did not err in reaching the decision, and the mother's contentions about the trial judge's reasoning and understanding of her case were not substantiated.

The court dismissed the mother's appeal and ordered her to pay the father's costs of and incidental to the appeal. The form of the order was subject to the entry of the order in the Court’s records. The appeal was dismissed, and the mother was required to cover the costs associated with the father's appeal, to be agreed upon or assessed if necessary.