header-logo header-logo

01 October 2012 / Robert Micklem
Issue: 7531 / Categories: Features , Divorce , Family
printer mail-detail

Sharing is caring?

Parental rights should not trump children’s welfare, says Robert Micklem

This month saw the close of the government’s consultation on “Co-operative parenting following family separation”.

This sought to assess:

how the Children Act 1989 (CA 1989) could be amended to ensure courts adhere to the general principle that, on separation, it is in a child’s best interests for both parents to continue to play a role in their care and be jointly responsible for that child; and

whether the government should strengthen the court’s enforcement powers to deal with breaches of court-ordered contact arrangements.

Shared parenting

When deciding children matters, the courts already acknowledge that it is in a child’s best interest for both parents to be involved in their life. However, there is no express legislation to this effect and this has led to a social perception that the law does not fully recognise the importance both parents play in the upbringing of a child.

The government believes that enshrining the principle in law will restore public confidence in 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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll