header-logo header-logo

17 June 2010 / Rachel Morgan
Issue: 7422 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Facing the consequences

Rachel Morgan sheds light on hostile family break-ups & the use of a judicial weapon of last resort

Family practitioners are frequently met with the scenario where, upon relationship breakdown, one (or indeed both) parents are unhappy with the arrangements for their children. In happier cases, such difficulties can be resolved with a minimal amount of intervention by lawyers and the courts —once the initial hurt and acrimony have receded, the parents reach a modus vivendi which on the whole operates well—but in other cases children are not so fortunate and their parents can be engaged in litigation about them for many years.

When deciding a dispute in relation to the living arrangements for a child, the court must have regard to a checklist of factors set out at s 1(3) of the Children Act 1989 (the welfare checklist), and must treat the child’s welfare as paramount. One of the factors is “the likely effect on him of any change in his circumstances” which obliges practitioners to look at the situation on the ground and, if acting for a parent who wishes to change

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

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll