The respondent mother sought a stay of an order granting the father supervised access to the child pending the hearing of an appeal.
The court applied the three-part test for a stay: merits of the appeal, irreparable harm, and balance of convenience.
It found the appeal had arguable merit because the original decision was made solely on affidavit evidence without cross-examination despite serious allegations.
The court concluded that immediate access could cause irreparable harm by introducing the father to the child without preparation or counselling, given the child had never been told of his existence.
The stay was granted pending the scheduled appeal hearing.
