header-logo header-logo

Facing the consequences

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

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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll