![[2025] UKUT 027 (AAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_3a2BKne.png){kind=logo}
These appeals relate to the liability of the Appellant (whom I shall refer to as the “Father” ) to make payments to the Second Respondent (whom I shall refer to as the “Mother” ) in respect of the mai
These appeals relate to the liability of the Appellant (whom I shall refer to as the “Father”) to make payments to the Second Respondent (whom I shall refer to as the “Mother”) in respect of the maintenance of the two children of their marriage.
They represent but one chapter in a lengthy and protracted dispute between the parties about financial provision for their children. They are ‘second time around’ appeals. That means that these appeals have has already come to the Upper Tribunal once before, and the Upper Tribunal allowed the appeals and remitted them to the First-tier Tribunal for a new tribunal to decide afresh. Those new decisions are the decisions now under appeal.
In legal terms this case is mainly about whether the First-tier Tribunal made adequate findings of fact to support its decision that the Father provides “day to day care” of the children to a lesser extent than the Mother, and whether it explained its decisions clearly enough.
- Heading
- The decision of the Upper Tribunal is to allow the appeals. The decisions of the First-tier Tribunal involved an error of law. Under section 12(2) (a), (b)(i) and (3) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enfo
- These appeals relate to the liability of the Appellant (whom I shall refer to as the “Father” ) to make payments to the Second Respondent (whom I shall refer to as the “Mother” ) in respect of the mai
- I give guidance to the First-tier Tribunal about
- Factual background
- Legal framework
- The First-tier Tribunal’s decision
- The permission stage and the parties’ submissions
- Analysis
- The Tribunal’s fact finding
- Reasons
- What the reasons must cover
- Conclusions