Child Arrangement During Lockdown Concerns

Concerns

If I have a Child Arrangements Order in force for my partner/ex-spouse to see the children of the family do I have to comply with the Order?

Government Guidance say:  ‘Where parents do not live in the same household, children under 18 can be moved from their parent’s homes”. This is clearly an exception to the “Stay at Homes Rules.” The decision that has to be made by parents,  ‘Is it safe for this to happen?”  For example, what occurs if the other parent works for the NHS or as a result of employment is in contact with a number of different people as a result of his or her employment. Clearly this would be unsafe. The parents have to assess what is in the best interests of the children, taking into account the children’s present health, the risk of infection, and the presence of any recognised vulnerable individuals in the household, for example, if the child’s mother or father are asthmatic.       

This is a time when parents should try and communicate with each other about their concerns.  Even if some parents think it is safe for child arrangements to take place by way of visitation or overnight stays others may be genuinely concerned. The parent’s should try and discuss their concerns and try to reach a temporary compromise until lockdown is over and the Order can be fully complied with.

What cannot happen?

Where a Child Arrangements Order is in the force the other parent cannot say there will be no Children’s Arrangements until after lockdown.   In the words of The Rt. Hon. Sir Andrew McFarlane, President of the Family Division and Head of Family Justice, “The key message is  that, where Coronavirus restrictions cause the letter of the Court Order to be varied, the spirit of the Order should nevertheless be delivered by making safe alternative arrangements for the children.”

How can parents deliver safe alternative Children’s Arrangements?

The children’s parents can agree Child Arrangements by facetime, skype, zoom, WhatsApp, or other video communication or by telephone. The main message is to keep all family members safe with the children’s interests being paramount.

What action do I take if my ex-spouse/partner refuses to agree on the children’s arrangement when a court order is in force?

Even though there is lockdown the Family Court are still operating mainly by way of remote telephone hearings or hearing via skype. Applications for Children’s Arrangements Orders and Application to Vary or Enforce Children’s Arrangements Order may be made to the Court.

How can I obtain a child/children’s arrangements order during lockdown?

The Court’s are working very hard to ensure that new cases relating to Children are still listed for Hearing. Parents may make an application to the Court for a Children’s Arrangements Order, which will usually be listed for a remote hearing as soon as practicably possible. The Court is doing its best to ensure that both parents are able to continue to spend time with their children unless there is a very good reason why they should not do so.   Clearly it is very wrong for one parent to refuse the other any contact with their children and it is totally unfair to the children.

If you have any concerns relating to children’s disputes please do not hesitate to contact Lynette-Ann A’Court – Senior Family Solicitor at Aston Bond for your free initial interview  – Mobile: – 07754662438 Email – lacourt@astonbond.co.uk

Divorce Process Overview

Divorce Process Overview

The divorce process: A marriage is dissolved by a decree of divorce which is pronounced after one party has filed a Divorce Petition in the English Court which asserts the irretrievable breakdown of marriage. This has to be proved by one of five grounds, these are:

  • Adultery,
  • Unreasonable behaviour
  • Two Years Desertion
  • Two Years Separation by Consent
  • Five Years Separation.

The grounds most often used are Unreasonable Behaviour or Adultery.

Once Divorce Proceedings are underway the Court has power to make financial orders against each party, provided that an Application is made to Court, this is another part of the divorce process.

Financial Matters and Divorce

The principal statute is the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.  Sections 23 and 24 establish the Court’s range of powers which are:  lump sum orders, property adjustment orders, periodical payments orders (maintenance orders) pension  orders, orders for sale of property and the division of the proceeds, variation of trusts.

Clearly some of these powers relate to income provision and some to capital provision.  In a normal middle asset case an award might be a mixture of both types of order, but in a high asset case the award will generally be just for capital.   The Court only has power to make orders against the husband and wife, not third parties.

When the Court considers making an order it must take into account Section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, namely:-

  • Interests of the children paramount
  • Age of the parties
  • Capital and income resources
  • Capital and income needs and obligations
  • Standard of living during the marriage
  • Physical or mental disability
  • Contributions to the welfare of the family made during the marriage or in the future
  • Misconduct (This is very rarely applied)
  • Value of lost benefits because of divorce
  • The need, if possible without hardship, to achieve a financial clean break between the parties
  • All of the circumstances of the case

The above points tell the court what to take into account but they do not say how or what the objective for the Judge should be.  The final decision for the Judge as to the award he or she makes is discretionary.  The above points are not in order of priority but in some cases one factor will be more important than another.

THE LEADING CASES ARE:  WHITE –v- WHITE (2001)  MILLER –v- MILLER and McFARLANE –v- McFARLANE (joint appeals) (2006)  CHARMAN –v- CHARMAN (2007) and RADMACHER –v- GRANATINO (2010)

From the above cases the following principles have arisen

  • The Court will take into account all of the parties resources, valued realistically in the event that the case proceeds to trial and is not settled the Court will be looking at the valuations as at the date of trial.
  • The resources will be distributed between the parties fairly.

Fairness has three strands, meeting the parties needs, sharing and compensation.

Needs

To ascertain and meeting the parties needs is the basis upon which the majority of cases are determined.   When assessing needs the Court will look at the resources and the standard of  living of the parties  during the marriage and the length of the marriage.  The needs of both parties to the marriage are very important.

The main needs are for housing and income.  Due to the breakdown of the marriage and the parties requiring separate homes.    It is unlikely that the housing need will be at the same level as the matrimonial home.  It can be however, if there are high assets.

The income needs will be assessed by reference to a claimed list of expenditure and to the marital standard of living.  Ridiculous claims will not be taken into account.  The Court can order periodical payments for maintenance and may order a lump sum payment of money.

The Court will decide if the income provision should be for the whole life or for some shorter period (a term:  the length of the marriage,  a period of time to give the other party time to re-establish their career,   when the children cease full-time education or such term as ordered by the Court).

Compensation

Rarely used as needs are usually used.

Sharing

If the total capital resources exceeds the sum required to meet the needs of both parties, the Court will consider sharing the rest unless the wealth has come from an inheritance or from funds of the parties prior to the marriage.    With inherited wealth the Court usually look to the party who received the Inheritance retaining it but should there  be a need it will be used in the financial settlement.

The essential rule is that wealth built up during the marriage should be shared equally irrespective of the roles of the parties, whether money-making or home-making. To do otherwise would be discriminatory and unlawful. The wealth for sharing is called The Matrimonial Property.

Non Matrimonial Property

This consists of wealth brought into the marriage by one party or wealth inherited during the marriage or to a lesser extent wealth generated after the parties separation

Non Matrimonial Property is not completely excluded.    It is completely included if it is needed to meet needs.  Also it may transform into matrimonial property over time if it is mingled or merged (especially over a long marriage).

Unequal sharing of matrimonial property can be ordered in very high asset cases if the Court finds the money maker has made a special contribution.

Resources

The Court will take into account all of the parties assets anywhere in the world and whether or not they are held in their own names or through another entity. Both parties must make full and frank disclosure of their resources and give documentary proof to prove their disclosure.  Failure to make full and frank disclosure may result in any settlement being set aside.

If you require assistance with the divorce process please do not hesitate to contact us here. We offer a free initial consultation to every new client, so get in touch today. 01753 486 777

Lynette A’Court

Head of Family Law

 

Have you been calculating your assets wrong?

The Ministry of Justice is currently investigating a fault that has been found in their online software. ‘Form E’ on the Ministry of Justice website is used by thousands of couples to input their assets and financial details when going through divorce proceedings. It is a simple online form used when applying for a financial order that requires individuals to give full and frank disclosure of their finances, in order to facilitate a division of these assets. Continue reading “Have you been calculating your assets wrong?”

Improved Adoption Rights

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has published guidance for employers whose employees have or are adopting children. The guidance, effective of 5 April 2015, stipulates that individuals who adopt qualify for adoption leave from their first day of employment. Continue reading “Improved Adoption Rights”

Its not all festive cheer at Christmas time in Family Law

So its that time of year again. You’re likely looking forward to the festival period as quality time to spend with the family. No more crushed commuters, deadlines, presentations and general work stress. You’ll be glad to turn your office phone off for at least 48 hours, and you look forward to having the mother-in law over, oh happy days.

Its about fun at home with friends and family. Making mulled Wine (hopefully you have cinnamon at home), enjoying indulgent treats, listening to the kids singing around the Christmas tree, baking mince pie’s, or waiting for your on-line delivery to arrive. This also involves concentrating on being aware that the doorbell may ring between 10.30am and 11am, whilst you’re cleaning the family silver. Perhaps  if you are lucky enough to have this kind of experience at Christmas, you should relish every moment of it.

Well back  to reality and there is a reason why family lawyers say January is the busiest month for new divorce  inquiries. It has even picked up the term “DDay”. The first Monday back to work after the festival season, family lawyers are bracing themselves. Sometimes its the day after the kids have been dropped off to school, why  is this the busiest month? For those that have domestic bliss, then exit here.  If you are one of  many that dread this time of year then you’re not alone.

Throughout the year, many of us are living the rat race, with no time to stop and think.  Any problems that you may be facing in your marriage, are pushed aside for another day.  The Christmas period may force you to really think about these issues that have been festering. Throw in the stress of extended family, money worries and its not just the Christmas pudding that lights up.

It is a sad reality that whilst this time of year is supposed to be full of laughter and cheer, many will be wondering if they really want to continue in relationships that unfortunately, do not make them happy any more.  Sometimes it really is that simple. When all is said and done, life is short and as each year passes, this becomes a stark reality to many.

Couples are sometimes forced to spend time together and they realise that they quite simply have grown apart.   The only thing keeping them together is the mundane routine, the children, the fear.

Any decent family lawyer will encourage you to think carefully about  ending a marriage, whether its been twenty years or two. Rushing into a divorce is never a great step to take but you may want to weigh up your options and get a realistic idea of what is involved  in the legal process.

So if you are finding that  your Christmas is more  festival fear than festive fun, fear no more

As a special offer, Aston Bond are offering  a 30 minute FREE  telephone consultation throughout the Christmas period and January with an experienced family lawyer.  Whether you are looking to divorce your spouse, or just want to know what your options are, pick up the phone and give us a call – 01753 486 777.  If you are going to take this step, then you need to make an informed decision without any pressure or worry with regards to paying thousands or making any hasty decisions.

Sometimes picking up the phone is the hardest step, but there is no pressure, just a chance to find out a little more about what your options are.

 

Monisha Ferguson, Family Solicitor

mferguson@astonbond.co.uk

01753 486 777

Divorce, what is it like? What Aston Bond can do to help.

It sounds strange, but as a divorce lawyer you never know what your clients will throw at you.

The other dreaded D word- DIVORCE.

This normally means fundamental changes, upheaval and pretty much the only guarantee is certain uncertainty  for the very immediate future.

Everyone knows someone who “got taken to the cleaners- by their better half or in some cases their lawyers”. It can make  sane people reach for the prozac, a bottle or sometimes both. The truth is it is never an easy step to take. I would compare it to the analogy of having to visit your dentist to have some root canal work carried out. It is painful. Emotionally and financially. However once the pain wears off you can be glad its over and that you took the initial step to do it.

I have never had a client who regretted getting a divorce. The only regret is that they wished they did it earlier and didn’t spend hours talking to “friends, colleagues, people down the pub” giving them their stories that have nothing to do with your individual circumstances. It’s a FACT that each case is different so you cannot generalise.  By the very nature of what you are doing it is not going to be a wonderful experience but it is a FACT that most families move forward and have no regrets. This includes children, who wish their parents had divorced a long time ago.

Studies from adults with parents whom had “unhappy marriages” and ‘put off’ divorcing to keep the family together, wish that their parents had divorced sooner.

Children are more perceptive than we give them credit for. They can see unhappy parents, and sometimes as adults feel guilty that their parents may have sacrificed their happiness to keep the family together.

A good lawyer will empathise with you and not force you to take any rash decisions. This is why  ASTON BOND offer consultations for you to “test the water“ and get  sound advice. For example most people think they have to go to court to get a divorce. It’s a FACT that most divorces are paper exercises and not contested.

Sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous tool  so always go to a qualified lawyer when it comes to obtaining a full understanding of what’s involved and of course as Malcolm Ford said in preschool (son of Harrison Ford);

“ My daddy is a movie actor and sometimes he plays the good guy, and sometimes he plays the lawyer!“.

Well that’s Hollywood fiction for you… but  it’s the lawyer that can help you get what you want.

 

Monisha Ferguson, Senior Family Solicitor

Civil partnerships can now be converted into legal marriage

Culture Secretary Sajid Javid has confirmed that from December 2014 couples will be able to convert their civil partnerships into marriages.

Same sex couples first received the right to marry in March 2014 under the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, prior to which they were only permitted to enter into civil partnerships as per the Civil Partnership Act 2004. Now those who have already entered into a civil partnership can have their civil partnership turned into a legal marriage.

The process for conversion is fairly simple. Both parties of the civil partnership will need to sign a declaration in the presence of each other and in front of the superintendent registrar in order to become legally married.  The fee for such a conversion is £45.00 and the parties will be issued with a marriage certificate once the process is complete.

Critics question why, when civil partnerships exist, same sex couples need to get married. After all, civil partnerships are legal relationships and enable parties to have the same rights as a spouse in terms of inheritance, immigration, pension provisions and child maintenance. However civil partnerships are only civil procedures and are not the same as religious weddings or civil marriages. In addition, many believe that by creating a different form of partnership for same sex couples compared to different sex couples, a message is being sent to society: homosexual relationships are not as valid as heterosexual ones.

It is clear, however, that the introduction of same sex marriage is seminal for equality campaigners and takes a further step to remove legal differences between heterosexual and homosexual relationships.

Amarjit Atwal, Paralegal

Validity of pre-nuptial agreements

Following the landmark ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Radmacher v Granatino [2010] UKSC 42; the law regarding the validity of pre-nuptial agreements has changed.

Previously, it was believed that pre-nuptial agreements were bad for ‘public policy’. They were therefore only given limited scope as to the intention of the parties when deciding upon what was or were not ‘marital assets’.

Subsequent to this ruling, pre-nuptial agreements are now fully enforceable in English law providing that the criterion is met. This, for ease of reference, is:

The agreement has been freely entered into and both parties understand the consequences of signing the agreement (referred to in the judgment as being ‘freely entered into by each party with a full appreciation of its implications’);

Whether, in entering into the agreement, one party has been misinformed or deceived by the other. There must, therefore, be full information provided that is material to the substance of the financial assets;

If there are any pressures applied to the other person entering into the agreement then the agreement will be unenforceable in law; and

A general overview as to the circumstances of the parties, taken into account any children, the manner in which their financial dealings appear, and whether in enforcing the agreement, one party will be left in financial ‘need’.

The basic premise of a pre-nuptial agreement would appear to fall squarely in the present regime of Family Justice. It caters for the Children of the Family, as-well-as placing restrictions upon one spouse unreasonable benefiting at the expense of the other.

However, it is clearly worth noting at this stage that a marriage is ‘the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others (per Lord Penzance in the case of Hyde v Hyde). What therefore comes of this old legal notion?

A child’s welfare v the effective administration of Court time

Having recently attended the Principal Registry of the Family Division (PRFD) for a first appointment of a child contact matter, it was interesting to note that the Court insisted upon the attendance of children over the age of 10. Ordinarily District Judges’ are of the opinion that a Court is not the place for children.

It was interesting to see the benefits of having children in attendance, namely that officers of the Children and Family Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS) could discuss the substantive matter with a child as to whether they would want to have contact with the ‘absent parent’. This would appear to be a far better use of Court time rather than making parents wait the obligatory 14 weeks for a CAFCASS appointment. However, what of the risk to the child?

It is somewhat of an overwhelming experience attending Court, particularly if you’re not used to the formal settings. What, therefore, would a child of 10 make of it?

It poses the emotive question as to whether Court time should be saved (particularly in the current economic climate) against the overall question of whether a child’s welfare should still be regarded as the paramount consideration?

01753 486 777