CH-2025-BRS-000001 - [2025] EWHC 2373 (Ch)

Here it is said that the judge failed to give sufficient weight to the correspondence before him, and to corroborative documents available, and also failed to evaluate substantial and important passages of evidence that went to the “central issue”. (I will assume that this is the question of the removal of Julian. If it is meant to be anything else, then I do not know what it is.) Again, before I can interfere, I have to be satisfied that the judge was plainly wrong on one or more of these questions of fact finding. What weight to give to the evidence was a matter for the judge. The fact that the appellant does not like the judge’s decision, or that another judge might make a different decision, is irrelevant. And there is no other basis put forward for showing that the judge was plainly wrong. This ground too fails.