header-logo header-logo

22 May 2015 / Jonathan Herring
Issue: 7653 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Taking sides

nlj_7653_herring

Jonathan Herring questions the family courts’ treatment of wilful children

A relationship breaks down. Acrimony fills the air. Accusations fly. The father says the mother is stopping the children from seeing him. The mother says the children don’t want to see their father, unsurprisingly given what he has done. The lawyers wade in and it’s off to court. What is a judge to do?

Basic legal principles

The family courts have been struggling to find the correct legal solution to such cases for decades. The basic legal principles are clear. The judge must make the order which will best promote the welfare of the child. In most cases that will mean the child will spend time with both parents. There is now an impressively large number of orders available to judges in cases of disputed contact ranging from imprisonment of a parent seen to be preventing the children seeing the other parent; to an order prohibiting a parent seeing a child. Increasingly courts will rely on therapists and mediators to fashion a solution. Many experts

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll