WINTER & FRENCH

In the case of Winter & French, the appellant mother appealed against the parenting orders made by the Family Court and the subsequent order for costs, both made by Demack FM. The central issue in the appeal was whether the trial Judge had failed to appropriately weigh an "essay" filed by the appellant in accordance with the Judge's order. The mother argued that her attitude towards the respondent father had changed, a contention supported by the essay and other evidence. However, the trial Judge found that the mother's attitude remained unsatisfactory and had not improved despite her attempts to modify her behaviour.

The court examined the trial Judge's reasoning and found no error in her Honour's assessment. The trial Judge had acknowledged the mother's efforts to change but ultimately attributed more weight to the incidents occurring after the mother had undertaken the Parenting Course and the mother's performance as a witness. The court held that the trial Judge's finding that the mother's efforts to modify her behaviour had been unsuccessful did not demonstrate a failure to appropriately weigh the essay's contents. Instead, it reflected that the trial Judge had given more credence to the evidence of the mother's actions following the Parenting Course than to her contentions in the essay.

The court also addressed the costs order, which the appellant mother challenged. The mother had applied for a stay of the parenting orders pending the appeal, which was dismissed. She was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the stay application. New evidence was presented at the appeal hearing, indicating that the respondent had been charged with giving false evidence, which stemmed from the stay application proceedings. The court considered the case of CDJ v VAJ and determined that the trial Judge's costs order was erroneous in light of the new evidence. Consequently, the costs order was set aside, and the issue of costs was remitted for rehearing by the trial Judge following the conclusion of the criminal proceedings involving the respondent.

The court dismissed the appeal against the parenting orders, allowed the appeal against the costs order, set aside the costs order, and remitted the costs issue for rehearing. No costs were ordered for either appeal.