The High Court has removed a €60 weekly maintenance payment to the respondent while otherwise affirming a Circuit Court judicial separation order after a de novo appeal hearing.
The applicant appealed aspects of the Circuit Court order. The respondent did not appeal. In an ex tempore judgment delivered on 11 October 2017, Mr Justice Twomey said the appeal would succeed only in part.
The applicant accepted the existing access arrangements for the parties’ two sons, subject to any further arrangements the parties might agree. The judge said no amendment to the access order was needed for that, as it already allowed for agreement between them. He expressed the hope that they could agree further access in the children’s interests.
The applicant also sought an order requiring both parties to keep the other informed about all medical and educational matters concerning the children. The court amended the Circuit Court order to include that requirement.
The applicant’s main argument concerned his wish to remain in the family home. The High Court heard no evidence that would justify changing the Circuit Court’s conclusion that the parents had joint custody, with primary care and control granted to the respondent. The judge concluded that the children should live with their mother in the family home as their primary carer until they were no longer dependent. He therefore reached the same conclusion as the Circuit Court on the home.
On maintenance, the applicant relied on the respondent’s 2016 P60 as evidence of weekly net income of about €490 after pension contributions. The judgment said that figure was about €60 higher than the income stated in the respondent’s affidavit of means. The applicant’s counsel submitted that it also exceeded the figure in the affidavit provided to the Circuit Court.
The court removed the applicant’s obligation to pay the respondent €60 a week, concluding that the change made proper provision for the parties and their dependent children in light of their respective means. The judge also said it would leave the applicant with more money towards rent and could reduce contact and future disputes between the parents. He noted that the applicant had met the children’s unanticipated costs when they were with him, although the order did not require him to do so.
The High Court affirmed the Circuit Court order except for the changes on sharing medical and educational information and removing the maintenance payment. It noted that the appeal had been heard de novo and described the original order as having followed a three-day hearing.