header-logo header-logo

16 August 2018
Issue: 7806 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 17 August 2018

Joy of the stay over; brief work; (in)solving nothing.

THE OVERNIGHT GAME

Child support maintenance will be reduced if the payer (to hell with the statutory jargon) has one or more of the children with them for at least 52 nights a year (for example, by one-seventh for 52 to 103 nights in the year). Cynics would have you believe that the reduction scheme within sch 1 to the Child Support Act 1991 and regs 46 and 47 of the Child Support Maintenance Calculations Regulations 2012 (SI 2012/2677) is occasionally the driving force behind the payer’s court application for increased contact.

In JS v SSWP and another [2018] UKUT 181 (AAC) the Upper Tribunal drew attention to the fact that the current calculations regulations differ from their predecessors in that the maintenance assessment is to look forward for 12 months from the effective date. What has to be determined is the number of nights the payer is expected to have care during the 12 month period. The regulations provide that in making the determination

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll