7/6/2016
START DATE
END DATE
11/22/2016
C v D
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
Court of Appeal for Bermuda
Family Law
Baker President Bell JA Bernard JA
David Kessaram (Cox Hallett Wilkinson Limited)
Adam Richards (Marshall Diel & Myers Limited)
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The case involved a dispute over interim care and control of two minors A & B and a prohibition against the mother removing them from Bermuda. The father was granted interim care and control by an ex parte order on June 7 2016 which was challenged by the mother. The appeal court criticized the ex parte nature of the initial order and the failure to address conflicts in evidence and procedural fairness.
SUMMARY:
Validity and fairness of ex parte orders for child custody procedural fairness in family law
OUTCOMES:
Appeal allowed costs awarded to the mother interim care and control to be reviewed
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Mother
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies
C v D
The case involved a dispute over interim care and control of two minors A & B and a prohibition against the mother removing them from Bermuda. The father was granted interim care and control by an ex parte order on June 7 2016 which was challenged by the mother. The appeal court criticized the ex parte nature of the initial order and the failure to address conflicts in evidence and procedural fairness.