Subsidising another man's child, Wealthy ex-wives, nominal orders, Housing benefit and unmarried payments
AGREEMENTS IN CHILDREN CAPITAL PROCEEDINGS
Do the principles enunciated in Edgar v Edgar [1980] 3 All ER 887, [1980] 1 WLR 1410 apply in Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) financial proceedings? Where there are two fathers, does the wealthier father have to subsidise the child of the poorer? In Morgan v Hill [2006] EWCA Civ 1602, [2006] All ER (D) 386 (Nov), the Court of Appeal said ‘yes’ and ‘yes, probably’.
Janet Hill (H) has two children: Mark, aged six, by the appellant, Stephen Morgan (M) and Mary, aged nine, by an unnamed father (N). Morgan is “immensely rich” (para 4). History does not relate N’s finances save that an application by M for financial provision by him was settled on terms that he would pay £12,000 per annum plus school fees.
Terms had earlier been agreed with M involving provision of capital (a share in property bought with H’s sister), periodical payments of £3,250 per calendar month and payment of school fees. The agreement was not incorporated
