header-logo header-logo

Making contact work

05 February 2016 / Camilla Fusco
Issue: 7685 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Camilla Fusco provides guidance for putting in place successful contact arrangements

Most family law practitioners will have experience of making applications for child arrangement orders (CAOs) which regulate the arrangements concerning whom a child will spend time with and when (formerly contact). However, advising clients about the most effective remedies for enforcement of such orders (referred to here as “contact orders”) can be far more difficult. This article examines the powers and sanctions available to the court in contact cases.

Background

The family courts have faced criticism from some as being slow to enforce court orders in child contact cases. Often the concern for judges (and clients) is that the enforcement route may increase the level of conflict and impact adversely on the child. A report published in December 2013 by Exeter University entitled Enforcing contact orders—problem-solving or punishment? (Liz Trinder, Joan Hunt, Alison Macleod, Julia Pearce, Hilary Woodward) analysed a nationally representative sample of 215 enforcement applications and reached some interesting conclusions:

  1. Although the public perception is that enforcement problems stem from implacably hostile mothers
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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll