header-logo header-logo

Child law

29 July 2010
Issue: 7428 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Green) v Secretary of State for the Department for Work and Pensions [2010] EWHC 1278 (Admin), [2010] All ER (D) 192 (Jul)

The August 2002 version of the Child Support Guide, vol 7 made it clear that there was a discretion to be exercised by the Child Support Agency (CSA) in determining whether to permit the school fees payment to be offset against child support. It expressly stated that the discretionary decision had to be based on the circumstances of the individual case, with consideration being given to the welfare of the child at all times.

However, it was plain that in exercising that discretion, the CSA was to give weight to the current view of the parent with care. However, if the parent with care did not agree to it, there nevertheless remained a discretion to be exercised because the guidance did not make everything dependent on the current wish of the parent with care but enjoined the decision maker to take into account all the circumstances of the case.

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

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

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

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