All Things Family Law

**UPDATED 25 March 2020** Last night, after the Prime Minister's address to the nation, I promised to try to answer some of the questions now faced by those separated parents worried about how the Government’s latest advice will impact both on existing arrangements with their children and those seeking orders. I have seen and read many social media comments about this topic. There seems to be a wide divergence of views from family lawyers up and down the country. The Law (briefly, I promise!) The first (and perhaps obvious) thing to say is that these are unprecedented times. There is no precedent for the treatment by the courts of the impact of Covid-19 on the movement of children across different households.   In short summary, as a parent enforcing an order you must prove b eyond all reasonable doubt (note the much higher criminal standard of proof) that there has been a breach of the order. The other parent may have a defence if they can prove, on the balance of

There are various versions of the myth about gold and rainbows. Perhaps the most ancient version goes that fairies with great wealth buried their treasures and gold at the end of the rainbow, guarded by Leprechauns. Any experienced family lawyer, therefore, has to be on alert to the fact that the colour of one’s disclosure might in fact be caused by reflection, refraction and dispersion of light.

With Brexit dominating the political arena, one could be forgiven for failing to notice that in December 2018 the Divorce (Financial Provision) Bill had its third reading in the House of Lords and is continuing to make its way through Parliament.    Such is the concern within the family law community that the Law Society Gazette reported earlier this month that Lady Hale, the President of the Supreme Court, had taken the highly unusual step of criticising the bill ( https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/hale-risks-political-storm-by-questioning-legislation-before-parliament/5070911.article ). So what is it all about? The bill, if it passes through parliament and becomes law, proposes to radicalise the way financial settlements are made on divorce. It seeks, in some respects, to pull the rug from beneath the discretionary feet upon which the family courts presently make decisions, potentially removing the uncertainty as to a spouse’s entitlement on a divorce.  

It is perhaps of no surprise that the English courts have seen a massive rise in cases concerning dowry issues and, in particular, jewellery exchanged on marriage. The whereabouts of jewellery, its origins, its value and whether it has been unlawfully retained by one spouse are just some of the issues the court will need to tackle at an early stage. Gold jewellery is often a source of dispute on divorce

Parental alienation is very serious. It undermines the very fabric of a child’s emotional well being. But it is complex. The court must assess all of the evidence. Why does the child not want to see the other parent? Is it justifiable? Have they witnessed abuse? Is this creating a distorted sense of loyalty to one parent? Or is the child a pawn in a game? These are just a few of the questions that need to be considered. As a family lawyer I can say that I have been on both sides of the fence. Whilst of course the evidence and how you present it is key, a crucial element to any such case is the observations of Cafcass (they are the eyes and ears of the court and will advise the court). Set out below is a tool kit applied by Cafcass as behaviours indicative of alienation. Typical behaviours exhibited by a child where they have experienced alienating behaviours

Double, Double ‘Goyal’ and Trouble: An Easy Way to Sharing Foreign Assets on Divorce? I n the hustle and bustle of the run up to Christmas one can (perhaps) be forgiven for overlooking the latest decision on the ability of the English courts to impose orders over foreign assets. Whilst we were all eating mince pies and watching Home Alone as if it were a new release, the court was seeking to provide clarity on an issue which is becoming so important in an increasingly globalised world. The case of Goyal v Goyal [2016] EWHC 2758 (Fam ) provides, at least in the interim, welcome guidance and reinforcement of the principles of sharing foreign assets. It is also a stark reminder of the fatality of failing to follow the correct procedures and how the court will not indulge such shortcomings even where a party does not have the benefit of legal representation (Mrs Goyal did not have a lawyer).   The (Brief) History Mr and Mrs   Goyal had been married for 8 years. Their

Last week I represented a Father in an application made by the Mother for permission to permanently remove their children from the country. The final hearing was listed for five days. I would like to use this blog to briefly summarise the law as it now stands in this area and to address the old age question as to whether   a Father get a rougher ride than a Mother in cases concerning children. Does gender bias exist? The extensive arguments filed on the applicable law reinforce how the higher courts have now (helpfully) unified the approach that should be taken in these cases. We now have clarity.   Without getting too bogged down in the law, the decision in a case known as Re F (a child) (International Relocation Cases) [2015] EWCA Civ 882 essentially says the court should now adopt a ‘holistic view’ of the children’s welfare. As part of the overall welfare consideration the court needs to place appropriate weight on the strength of the relationship between the Father and