header-logo header-logo

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

Child law

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll