David Burrows questions why magistrates' courts are reluctant to scrutinise liability orders
The time has come to look at the central role of magistrates' courts in dealing with enforcement under Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991). A major reason for this may be a real misunderstanding amongst magistrates' legal advisers of the limited ratio decidendi (basis for the decision) in Farley v Child Support Agency [2006] UKHL 31, [2006] 3 All ER 935 and of their consequent failure to appreciate the consequences of this misunderstanding.
In what follows it may be thought that I see injustice only for men. I do not. However, the hitherto passive role of the magistrates under CSA 1991 impacts mostly on men. The effects of the Act's Byzantine enforcement scheme impacts much worse on the children and their carer parent; but that hardship lies in another rancid corner of the Act's administration: the inability of the parent with care to enforce orders for arrears (R v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (ex parte Kehoe) [2005] UKHL 48, [2005]
