Moses-Taiga v Taiga [2005]

Moses-Taiga v Taiga [2005] EWCA Civ 1013; NMMT v MOT [2006] EWHC 2494 (Fam); Taiga v Ogbedo [2009] EWCA Civ 707);  M-T v T (Marriage: Strike Out) [2013] EWHC 2061 (Fam)

The latest round of proceedings which has just been reported as MT v OT [2018] EWHC 868 (Fam) concerns the financial provision to be made by the father for the parties’ twin daughters.  An important point of law arose concerning the housing provision for the twins.   The essential background is set out below:-

• The parties are the parents of twin girls born 20^th June 2001 (16). F has had no contact with the children since 2002.
• The parties have been engaged in litigation for over twelve years.
• The father is a man of great wealth and influence in Nigeria.
• The mother has previously applied for financial provision to be made for herself and the twins using the provsions within the Children Act 1989 more particularly Schedule 1 which allows the court to make financial orders for the benefit of children where the parents are not married.  Amongst the provision the court had provided for housing of the twins and their mother, our client, in a property owned by the father but subject to a tenancy at a peppercorn rent in favour of the mother to ensure the children had adequate housing during their minority. Within the order providing for the housing, there was permission to the mother,in the event of a housing dispute due to dispute with a neighbour, need for redevelopment or change which affects the enjoyment or amenity of that property, for the mother to apply back to the court.
• Amongst the numerous issues before the court was this issue – the mother’s application seeking permission from the court to move to another property.   Amongst the mother’s complaints were that the character of the neighbourhood had altered significantly with large new developments and increased traffic. Further that the father had continually failed to keep the property in good order and, finally, that the children had never liked the property.
• The father took the stance that there was no provision which would enable the mother and the twins to move to another property.  He contended that the court simply did not have the power under schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989 to make such provision.  The court, Mr Justice Cohen, rejected the father’s objections and consented to the relocation.
• The full judgement can be found at MT v OT [2018] EWHC 868 (Fam).
• Beverley Morris continues to represent the interests of the mother.