'The court gave custody to my wife'

For six years he was the perfect father. When his high-flying wife went to work, he stayed at home, having given up the job he loved to care for his young children.

However, a court has now given his wife custody of the two children and the right to take them hundreds of miles away from their home in London.

In its landmark judgment, the Court of Appeal said the "different roles and functions" of men and women suggested children involved in custody battles should be brought up by their mothers.

The ruling, with potential repercussions for fathers around the country, triggered immediate controversy.

Speaking exclusively to the Evening Standard, the distraught father condemned it as an attack on all men.

"What it says is that whatever we do, house-husbands have no rights. The whole thing has been a complete nightmare. I am convinced I would have been the better parent," he said.

The 46-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, added: "It is a fact that I have been around all the time and the children are used to me. We built strong bonds. If you reverse the roles - so that I had been at work and my wife had stayed at home with the children - there is no way I would have been given custody. I am totally incredulous that the legal system should allow this."

The arrangement seemed perfect after the couple married in the mid-Eighties. After having their first child his wife, now 37, went back to her job in the City on an annual salary of more than £300,000.

He quit his job in the maritime industry to take charge of the baby and their £1million home. The agreement held after the birth of a second child three years later.

"My day would involve getting up in the morning and doing what one might call the normal duties. I would get the children ready for school or nursery, getting them dressed and getting their breakfast ready.

"My wife would get herself ready and join us for breakfast and go to work. I would take the children to school and I organised a walk-toschool route for other parents. While the children were at school and nursery, I would tidy up the kitchen, do the washing and some shopping.

"After collecting one child I would give them lunch and play until it was time to pick up the other. We would have other children around to play or I would take them swimming and to the gym. I was quite happy. I got a lot of pleasure from the children. I never regretted giving up my job."

He said his wife worked punishingly long hours but added: "I always felt it was a partnership."

The end came abruptly. "My wife decided that was it. There are ups and downs in any marriage and I thought we would work through it but that was not going to happen."

His wife immediately applied for custody, saying she intended to stop working and care for the children - both aged under six - outside London. She wanted them to leave their private schools and be educated in the state sector close to their new home.

For the father, the loss of his marriage was a disaster but the loss of the children seemed worse. He also sought custody but lost a High Court case. It was that ruling the Court of Appeal upheld last week.

"I am still amazed," he said. "After everything I have done, all the rights seem to be with her. I will have to travel to be near the children - I have no choice, my bond with them is too strong - but both I and the children will be away from our friends and our systems of support.

"We are always saying 'where are the men to take on this modern role?' - and it is a rewarding one - but you can suddenly have everything taken away from you."

He says he has the support of many women and added: "I would not say my wife is a bad mother. She is a parent who works long hours but someone has to take the role of provider and that was me. The law should have been able to see that."