header-logo header-logo

17 June 2010 / Rachel Morgan
Issue: 7422 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Facing the consequences

Rachel Morgan sheds light on hostile family break-ups & the use of a judicial weapon of last resort

Family practitioners are frequently met with the scenario where, upon relationship breakdown, one (or indeed both) parents are unhappy with the arrangements for their children. In happier cases, such difficulties can be resolved with a minimal amount of intervention by lawyers and the courts —once the initial hurt and acrimony have receded, the parents reach a modus vivendi which on the whole operates well—but in other cases children are not so fortunate and their parents can be engaged in litigation about them for many years.

When deciding a dispute in relation to the living arrangements for a child, the court must have regard to a checklist of factors set out at s 1(3) of the Children Act 1989 (the welfare checklist), and must treat the child’s welfare as paramount. One of the factors is “the likely effect on him of any change in his circumstances” which obliges practitioners to look at the situation on the ground

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll