More general matters of law
54.
I now turn to more general matters of law. There are a number of issues of fact that I will have to determine. The burden of proof for establishing a disputed fact is on the party that seeks to prove it. The standard of proof is the normal balance of probabilities.
55.
HH has not himself attended court, although he has appeared by his lawyers. He has not given evidence. He has not submitted himself to cross-examination. Inevitably, this means that the evidence I have received has been solely from HRH and Director 1. Of course, this does not mean that I simply accept everything they say. I must consider the evidence critically and make appropriate findings of fact. I can, of course, if I consider it appropriate, draw inferences from the failure of HH to attend and give evidence but they must be appropriate inferences that I can properly draw. As Moylan LJ said in
- MR JUSTICE MOOR:-
- The relevant history, including the litigation history
- Sears Tooth
- Evidence filed in support of the respective cases
- The respective Open Proposals
- The parties’ Case Summaries
- Ilott v The Blue Cross and others
- Lilford (Lord) v Glynn
- Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989
- Haroutunian v Jennings
- Re P (Child: Financial Provision)
- Ilott
- DN v UD
- Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984
- Agbaje
- More general matters of law
- Moher v Moher
- Baker v Baker
- Prest v Petrodel
- Duxbury
- The evidence of HRH Princess Haya
- The evidence of Director 1
- My conclusions on the issues of principle
- Quantum
- Al-Khatib v Masry
- The security budget
- General maintenance
- The costs of security for the children as adults and the level of security
- Schedule A
- HRH’s home near Kensington Palace
- Castlewood
- Leisure
