top of page

March 6 2012

START DATE

END DATE

May 9 2013

S v F (Re Child Maintenance)

COURT:

LAW:

JUDGE(S):

CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:

DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:

The Supreme Court of Bermuda

CIVIL APPEAL

IAN RC KAWALEY CJ

Saul Dismont (for the Appellant)

The Respondent appeared in person

FACTS OF THE CASE:

Appellant appealed Family Court's refusal of child maintenance application citing Respondent's arrears and lack of support. Respondent claimed he provided support through groceries transport and contributions despite not giving money directly

SUMMARY:

Validity of Family Court's procedure adherence to statutory requirements for financial statements fairness of hearing rights

OUTCOMES:

Appeal dismissed factual basis for Respondent's contributions acknowledged

RULED IN FAVOUR OF:

Defendant

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: 

pdf.png
AI Chatbox Anchor

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

S v F (Re Child Maintenance)

Appellant appealed Family Court's refusal of child maintenance application citing Respondent's arrears and lack of support. Respondent claimed he provided support through groceries transport and contributions despite not giving money directly

bottom of page