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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll