Case Study: Self-represented dad succeeds in appeal

Amber appealed against a decision that parenting orders should be changed such that the children should be moved to the full-time care of Harry.  The judge had said that because Amber was unable to let go of her beliefs that Harry had physically and sexually abused the children, she represented an unacceptable risk of exposing the children to emotional harm.

There were eight detailed grounds of appeal and other difficult legal issues. Amber was represented by expensive, Sydney-city lawyers and a barrister.  Harry represented himself.

The appeal court dismissed all eight grounds of Amber’s appeal. Harry kept the care of his kids.

Jasapas & Johns (No. 2) [2020] FamCAFC 203 (17 August 2020)

The names have been changed in this case study.