The High Court has declared an applicant to be the father of twin children and appointed him their guardian on an interim basis, while ordering contact arrangements and a review of guardianship, custody and access. The ruling followed an appeal and cross-appeal from a Circuit Family Court order made on 26 October 2023.
In a judgment delivered on 14 December 2023, Ms Justice Nuala Jackson struck out the respondent’s appeal after she did not attend the hearing or present evidence in support of an adjournment. The court affirmed the Circuit Family Court’s orders, subject to changes it considered necessary because circumstances had changed and in the children’s interests.
The judge separately considered evidence on parentage because it was a status matter. The respondent had not complied with an earlier order to facilitate DNA sampling of the children. The judge drew inferences from that failure and also considered evidence from the respondent’s sister, communications between the parties around conception, and an expert assessor’s report and testimony. She found on the balance of probabilities that the applicant was the children’s father.
The court affirmed joint custody for both parties, with the respondent retaining primary care and control. It ordered interim contact to resume as soon as possible, including consecutive daytime visits in December and early January, followed by a recurring weekend schedule. It also ordered a psychological review assessment, with its cost shared equally, and set a review for the week of March 2024. The judgment directed that the children not be taken outside the jurisdiction without consent or a Circuit Family Court order.
On the applicant’s cross-appeal, the judge appointed him guardian on an interim basis, finding this to be in the children’s best interests. She said the respondent’s role as their mother should be promoted and supported, and expressed concern that joint parenting would remain difficult. Final orders on guardianship, custody and access were deferred to the review.
The judge declined to change the Circuit Family Court’s refusal to award the applicant costs of those proceedings. She cited his lack of complete success and the trial court’s reasons for its decision. Costs of the High Court appeal were left for submissions at the review hearing.