Judgment: 2012-10-30 · Court archive

High Court changes divorce appeal orders on custody, maintenance and inherited land

The court adjusted the children’s access arrangements and the division of property, while affirming parts of the Circuit Court order.

High Court · [2012] IEHC 582

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Michael White (Judge)
What

The court adjusted the children’s access arrangements and the division of property, while affirming parts of the Circuit Court order.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Family home
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The youngest child’s access to her father had been suspended after an incident on 20 February 2012. The judge found that bruising on the child’s back resulted from a blow with a wooden spoon, rather than from an ice pack, and described the punishment as unacceptable. The father had apologised.

The High Court varied a Circuit Court order in a family-law appeal, changing access arrangements for the youngest child, reducing weekly maintenance and reallocating inherited agricultural land. The appeal arose from divorce proceedings and an order made on 8 April 2011. Mr Justice Michael White delivered judgment on 30 October 2012.

The court said the parents had four children and had lived apart since November 2005. It affirmed the Circuit Court’s custody and access arrangements for the three older children, to continue until each reaches 18. It also said the father should not undermine that arrangement by seeking to have them live with him full time.

The youngest child’s access to her father had been suspended after an incident on 20 February 2012. The judge found that bruising on the child’s back resulted from a blow with a wooden spoon, rather than from an ice pack, and described the punishment as unacceptable. The father had apologised.

The High Court directed a phased resumption of contact: one unsupervised four-hour visit each week at the father’s residence, with the timing to be set by the court or agreed in consultation with the parties. After six months, this was to increase to a weekend day visit from 11am to 7pm, subject to a break every sixth weekend. The court said the arrangement should be reviewed after a year to consider whether overnight access could begin. It also requested continued involvement by child and family services and said all four children should be offered individual therapy.

On property, the court set the family home’s value at €141,000. After the outstanding mortgage was deducted, it apportioned the equity 60% to the mother and 40% to the father. The court awarded the mother all of the 26 acres of agricultural land, which she had inherited and later transferred into joint names. It accepted her evidence that she had been pressured to make that transfer.

The father’s €200 weekly maintenance obligation was reduced to €100, divided equally among the four children; the mother was to retain child benefit. The court affirmed the Circuit Court’s €25,000 contribution to the mother’s legal costs and €6,750 in maintenance arrears, and assessed a further €5,000 compensation for her payments on joint liabilities and mortgage protection. It directed that the resulting €12,753 net payment for the father’s interest in the family home be paid by 1 November 2013. No pension adjustment order was to be made.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review