header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
06 March 2008 / David Burrows
Issue: 7311 / Categories: Features , Public , Legal services , Family
printer mail-detail

Public v family

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Child support is a family, not an administrative, matter says David Burrows (from the barricades)

A strange and uncomfortable cohabitation exists between family (private), and administrative (public), lawyers over interpretations of the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) and in representation of parents and the secretary of state for work and pensions in child support proceedings. Is the law of child support maintenance more akin to family law; or is it more aptly the province of the administrative lawyer? You might think the name was a giveaway: finance for children surely implies family law? I doubt the lawyers who represent the secretary of state for work and pensions (who act in these cases) would agree.

My last case on child support (in early February) was an application for a declaration for two parents who said that certain aspects of the scheme had denied them the right to a fair—or indeed any—trial of issues relating to two assessments to child support maintenance many years ago. They were long out of time, probably, for

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

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll