Court Sitting Without Knowlegde

A

AskAboutIt

Guest
Hello,

I am farmilar with a case where a sitting of the District Court occured (Family Law related) and in fact did sit and proceeded despite the fact that one of the parties was not even made aware that it was occuring, is this possible?

Due to circumstances the applicant's solicitor only sent notice to the respondant's solictor 2 days before the court date. The respondant's solicitor was on holiday at the time but solicitors office did write a letter to the respondant to inform them and ask if they would be attending. The respondant only received this letter "after the court sitting".

It is confirmed by the court registrar that a last minute date was sought and that respondant's solicitor claimed to be acting on their behalf and attended on the day.

Respondant's solicitor claims to have been caught unaware "just back from holidays, unaware of things until they happened to be attending court on other business and became aware of things only as the applicants counsel mentioned to it them immediately before the sitting.

Court ordered in favour of applicant with no objection from respondant's solicitor. What action if any can taken? Any other opinions?
 
1. Appeal
2. Forget about the technicalities and side issues- what is this actually about and can it easily be resolved?
3. If there was short notice, it may be because of recurring problems with the specific issues, it may be that one party is being manipulative ( or not) and it is highly likely that the issue was flagged, was likely to end up in a court situation etc.,etc.

In family law cases, the situation as reported by any one person can be vastly different to the reality of the situation.

mf
 
Thanks for the reply mf1. You seem to have good knowledge of these things. :)
Unfortunately I am well aware of the complexities and "reported situations" in the Family Law hearings. I have tried to present this in a neutral and factual way or as close as I possibly can. Although I must say it would seem that manipulation goes without saying in such cases.

Info:

Partners split after 10year relationship.
They have 9 yr old child together.
Never married to each other and so only mother has legal Guardianship of child.
Father is a legal stranger as far as his legal rights are concerned in relation to the child - despite being named on Birth Cert and living with Mother and Child since birth.
(N.B. Take note if your are an unmarried father - Act now see web @ citizensinformation.ie/categories/birth-family-relationships/unmarried-couples/legal_guardianship_and_unmarried_couples )

I'm ignoring the usual infighting and pointing the finger of blame at one or other person. So I'll keep to the facts and events that are known to be true. Its fair to say that;

Parents were unable to agree on access arangements suitable to both after they split.
Father requested Guardianship of child to be granted by mother.
Mother not agreeable to father becoming Guardian.
Access was not occuring after both had time to settle.
Father applied after 5 months for access and guardianship to district court.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------
I've cut out the usual side shows that occur in such cases but need to mention the following that I believe is more difficult to verify accurately (with the help of the ability to hide behind "In Camera" rules)

I think its safe to say that;
the mother did not wish the father to become Guardian and did not wish the father to have access.
Solicitor for the father suggested adjourning Guardianship as a consession to show the Judge bona fide on the part of father and to show how awkard the mother was being. Solicitor for the father claimed to know that the judge sitting that day was not in favour of handing out Guardianship in such cases immediately as it may be mis-used for point scoring, etc. during the split and the Judge would normally request 6 months pass first.

Anyway in the end interim access was granted to father and Guardianship was struck out by consent. Agreed by solicitors before entering the court session, (in fact mother had a barrister present) and the judge simply made the agreement an order during the court.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------



Father was supprised to read the court order stating Guardianship "struck out"and not adjourned as expected, and was also suprised to learn the access order was "interim" and that was in fact what was adjourned. Another thing that wasn't expected was a clause that stated the child was not to leave the country without written permission of both parents.
Father had advice from serveral professional and independent agencies expressing doubts over how solicitor had handled the case in particular the Guardianship and was recommended to apply for it in person immediately. Father read and understood the importance of Guardianship and solicitor assured there was no problem with a tactical delay.

The application to the court mentioned in OP was by the mother and changed the original order by removing the clause requiring written consent of both parents for the child to go out of the country. Mother claims it was to allow a pre-arranged holiday for the child that was planned to take place in around a month's time and courts would be closed for summer. Mother claimed father was refusing to give consent. Father disagrees and claims he would have given consent.

So to answer your points

1) appeal - father does not want to appear in opposition to childs holiday or to be awkard.
2) More of an issue with the legal process mainly the integrity of solicitors actions. And pure horror that a court could sit without both parties being fully made aware of it.
3) With no hard proof it would be speculation but if I was asked for my honest opinion I would suspect manipulation might have been a factor (the mother maybe, unhappy at the restriction now in place requiring parental consent FFS what is parental consent? Not familiar with that LOL)

Does that paint a better picture of things? Is this normal to expect in such cases?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top