The High Court dismissed a wife’s appeals in a Dublin judicial separation case, citing delay and what it described as oppressive conduct in pursuing them. The decision was without prejudice to either party making claims in the continuing Circuit Court proceedings.
Mr Justice Henry Abbott delivered the judgment on 25 March 2011. The court was dealing with the husband’s application for directions on the appeals, which he said had become urgent because of the child’s welfare.
The appeals concerned a Circuit Court order made on 15 October 2009. That order extinguished the parties’ legal rights under the Succession Act in each other’s estate, set arrangements for custody and access, and stayed an attachment and committal order pending further order. It also deferred decisions on the family home and maintenance and provided for a section 47 report on longer-term custody and access arrangements.
The wife appealed the whole order in a notice dated 20 October 2010. She also filed a notice purporting to appeal a further Circuit Court order said to have been made on 22 November 2010. The High Court said the Circuit Court had in fact made no order that day, because the matter was already under appeal. The judge described the position as confusing: the first appeal included issues about the family home that had not yet been decided, while the later appeal and affidavit focused on custody, access and the proposed report.
The wife, who was then living in England after residing in France, sent emails saying pregnancy, ill health and the cost of travel prevented her from attending court. She also said she could face committal if she travelled to Ireland. The judgment records that she had not filed a book of appeal or attended through an agent, and had invited the court to decide the appeals on her affidavit. The judge said the husband was entitled to an oral hearing.
In dismissing the appeals, the judge cited the wife’s failure to prosecute them in court, the husband’s lack of access to the child since November 2010, and the need to resolve the child’s welfare issues. He also referred to the Circuit Court having made at least 15 orders between December 2008 and October 2010. The High Court’s order struck out the appeals; it did not determine the deferred family home or maintenance issues, which remained for the continuing Circuit Court proceedings.