header-logo header-logo

Family law

06 December 2013
Issue: 7587 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Constantinides v Constantinides [2013] EWHC 3688 (Fam), [2013] All ER (D) 336 (Nov)

Proceedings for the enforcement of a maintenance order which were registered in a magistrates’ court were not automatically ‘family proceedings’ so as to be the subject of the FPR, although by virtue of s 65(2) of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980  the court “may if it thinks fit order that [they]...be treated as family proceedings...” Section 93(6) of the 1980 Act and s 5 of the Debtors Act 1869 had to be construed and applied so as to have the same practical result and effect. Accordingly, a magistrates’ court could not find, for the purposes of s 93(6), that there had been “wilful refusal or culpable neglect” unless it was satisfied that the person in default “has or has had...the means to pay...” A magistrates’ court could not lawfully commit a person to prison for default in paying a maintenance order, or a maintenance order which had been registered in that court, unless it was satisfied that the payer had, or had had, the

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll