header-logo header-logo

Under one roof

30 October 2008
Issue: 7343 / Categories: Features , Family
printer mail-detail

Geraldine Morris looks at the implications of the Civil Partnership Act 2004

Family practitioners are generally aware that the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004) introduced provisions in relation to dissolution, nullity and separation orders largely equivalent to those set out in the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) regarding divorce, nullity and judicial separation. Equally, the provisions of the CPA 2004 regarding financial provision correspond with those for divorcing spouses under MCA 1973.

CPA 2004 is, however, a carefully drafted and comprehensive piece of legislation. It includes provisions in relation to remedies corresponding to those available to divorcing spouses under other legislation. In addition, although CPA 2004 has been in force since 2005, the lack of reported case law relating to civil partnership has led to a lack of up-to-date current awareness of civil partnership and the impact that reported divorce proceedings or different sex cohabitant cases may have upon civil partnership dissolution, ancillary relief and non civil partnership same sex relationships. Some of the areas where there are corresponding or comparable provisions which could be

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