On the 29th of April an important change was made to the rules governing the family courts.

The change is intended to encourage parties to family court proceedings to use ‘Non-Court Dispute Resolution’.

‘Non-Court Dispute Resolution’ means a method of resolving a dispute other than through the court process, such as mediation.

The rules allow the court to require the parties to complete a form setting out their views on using non-court dispute resolution as a means of resolving the matters raised in the proceedings.

And the court can adjourn the proceedings to enable non-court dispute resolution to take place, even if the parties do not agree to the adjournment.

And in relation to financial remedy proceedings the court may make an order for costs against one of the parties if that party failed without good reason to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting (‘MIAM’) or non-court dispute resolution.

Clearly, the courts are going to be expecting more financial remedy cases to be resolved out of court, in particular through mediation.

But that raises the question: if you go to mediation to sort out finances on divorce, do you need a lawyer?

The answer is that it would most certainly be advisable to instruct a lawyer, even if you hope to resolve your dispute via mediation. There are three primary reasons for this:

Firstly, you will need advice, at all stages of the mediation process. It is important to understand that the mediator cannot advise the parties, who will need to seek their own legal advice. And anyone going into mediation will need advice upon what is a reasonable settlement, before they agree to anything.

Secondly, if the mediation is successful and results in an agreed financial settlement then that settlement will need to be incorporated into a court order (known as a ‘consent order’), to ensure that the settlement is final and enforceable. A consent order is a complex legal document, which should always be drafted and approved by lawyers.

Thirdly, there is of course no guarantee that mediation will be successful, in which case the matter will have to go to court. Obviously, it would be advisable to have lawyers ready to deal with court proceedings in the event that no agreement is reached in mediation.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.Paragraph

Image: Ground Picture / Shutterstock.com

Parenting should of course be a joint venture, involving both the mother and the father. And the fact that the parents may have separated shouldn’t change this, unless the court specifies otherwise.

The joint nature of parenting is regularly recognised by judges, and any parent who takes the view that they are entitled to make important decisions regarding their children without reference to the other parent is likely to be criticised by the judge.

Which is exactly what happened in a case in the Family Court at Milton Keynes, the judgment in which was published recently.

The case concerned an application by a father for a child arrangements order in relation to his two children, who were then aged 10 and 9.

The judicial criticism stemmed from the history of the matter, which was as follows:

1. In May 2019 the court ordered that the children should live with their mother and see their father on alternate weekends, and half of the holidays.

2. In November 2019 a financial provision order was made requiring the father to provide a housing fund for the Mother in the sum of £410,000.  The order recorded that the intention was that “any property chosen must be in the jurisdiction and within a reasonable distance of the children’s school”.

3. On the 1st of September 2021 the mother removed the children from their school in Redhill, without telling the father. She also failed to inform the court at a hearing on the following day.

4. Unbeknownst to the father, the mother had entered into a tenancy agreement for a property in Buckinghamshire, unilaterally moving the children away, and from their school.

5. The mother then failed to give the father her new address.

6. The father returned the matter to the court, and in October 2021 contact was agreed, with the children being handed over at Watford Junction Train Station.

7. On the 7th of December 2021 the mother emailed the father’s solicitors and informed them that she would not be travelling to Watford Station after the Christmas holidays, as the cost was too demanding.

8. At the next hearing the arrangements for collection and handover were changed such that the mother would take the Children to East Croydon, and the father would return them at the end of contact.

9. At a hearing on the 6th of May 2022 the Mother sought to reduce contact to indirect contact only. The judge commented: “I get the strong impression that she has sought to deprive a relationship between father and children.”

10. In October 2022, the mother lost the use of a car and said she was no longer able to facilitate contact. Instead, she told the father that he could pick them up at any time.  The father works in Surrey, and to collect the children driving from work the drive to the mother’s home would take two and a half to three hours. The mother said she simply did not have the funds so could not afford to take the children to East Croydon.

The father returned the matter to the court again, applying for a variation of the child arrangements, and the judgment concerned this application.

The judge was not at all happy with the mother’s behaviour, pointing out that she had an obligation to ensure that contact took place in accordance with the existing orders – if she wanted to change an order it was for her to make an application to the court to vary it.

The judge said that the mother chose to move, without discussion with the father, to an isolated village in Buckinghamshire. She did not ask the father, or the Court.  He went on: “She cannot now come to the Court and say ‘because of the decisions I made without asking the Court or the father, I am not able to facilitate the contact and the father must come here’.”

The judge also said this: “The history of the mother making decisions about contact has to cease.  There should be no imbalance between the parents, they both have parental responsibility and their voices are equally loud and should be equally heard.  But the father having parental responsibility is not enough for this mother: she has not recognised that his involvement in significant decisions is as important as hers.  The mother appears to consider she has the ability to make decisions of some import for the children without the need for his involvement.”

The judge therefore made a shared ‘lives with’ order, to send a message to the mother, stating that the children would live with their father on alternate weekends. The mother would have to take the children to Redhill station, with the father responsible for returning them.

The judge also stated that if the matter were to come back before him then he may have no choice but to consider that the only way the children will see both parents is by the arrangements being swapped, with them living with their father, and seeing their mother on alternate weekends.

You can read the full report of the case here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Prostock-studio / Shutterstock.com

As we explained here last month, a finding of domestic abuse against a parent does not automatically bar that parent from seeing their child.

But the abuse will most certainly have a significant bearing upon any decision by a court relating to arrangements for the child.

This was clearly demonstrated by a recent decision of the Court of Appeal.

The decision concerned an appeal by a father against an order that he should have no face-to-face contact with his three-year-old son, for an indefinite period.

The background to the case was that the parents began their relationship in 2016, when the mother was aged 18 and the father 43. The relationship turned sour with violence on both sides, and as it was ending, the mother became pregnant and the child was born in early 2021. The parents briefly cooperated, but by the time the child was two months old, the position was again volatile.

In September 2021 the mother stopped the father from having unsupervised contact, after he had reported her to social services.

The father took the matter to court, and at a fact-finding hearing the court found that the parents’ behaviour had been “very poor indeed”, and that they had lost sight of the damage that attacking each other might do to the child.

Specifically the court found, amongst other things, that the mother could resort to physical violence, and that the father had engaged in coercive and controlling behaviour that included constantly criticising and belittling the mother, and on a number of occasions using physical violence.

Meanwhile, the father was having supervised contact with the child, which was generally of good quality and was enjoyed by father and son.

Despite this, the judge decided in December 2023 that all face-to-face contact between the father and the child should cease, taking the view that the risk of harm to the child from continuing direct contact, given the volatility of the parents’ relationship, was greater than the harm he would experience by it ceasing. There would therefore be indirect contact only.

The father appealed, to the Court of Appeal.

Giving the leading judgment Lord Justice Peter Jackson looked at the approach the court should take to contact in cases where domestic abuse is a feature and found that: “the court must approach the fundamental welfare assessment that underlies every decision with full alertness both to the inherent value of the parent-child relationship and to the significance of any harm that a contact order may entail for the child or for the parent with care. Where these considerations conflict, the court must identify the best solution for the child or, where there is no good solution, the least worst one.”

That was what the judge had done. Having found that there was both a real and a perceived risk of harm to the mother arising from the father’s attitude, she was entitled to consider that the current level of contact was unsustainable.

The father’s appeal was therefore dismissed.

The final words of Lord Justice Jackson’s judgment are telling and should, perhaps, be heeded by all separated parents. He said:

“I accept that it seems unfair that, where both parents are responsible for the situation they have created around their child, the relationship between the child and one parent has to suffer. That is the unfortunate consequence of extreme family situations of this kind, which sometimes demand that priority is given to the relationship between the child and the other parent in an attempt to prevent even worse outcomes.”

You can read the full report of the appeal here.

*          *          *Paragraph

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Tiko Aramyan / Shutterstock.com

It is not unusual for a separated parent to want to change their child’s name.

But a child’s name may only be changed with the agreement of anyone who has parental responsibility for the child, or the permission of the court.

If the court is asked for permission to change the child’s name it will decide the matter by reference to what it believes to be best for the child’s welfare. This will involve consideration of such matters as the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned (considered in the light of their age and understanding), the likely effect of any change, and any harm that the child may have suffered or is at risk of suffering.

Note that reasons given for changing or seeking to change a child’s name based on the fact that the child’s name is or is not the same as the parent making the application do not generally carry much weight.

Note also that where the child’s parents were not married to each other, the mother has control over registration of the child’s surname. Consequently, on an application to change the surname of the child, the degree of commitment of the father to the child, the quality of contact, if it occurs, between the father and the child, and the existence or absence of parental responsibility may be relevant.

An example of a change of name application occurred in a recent case that took place in the Family Court at Watford.

The application was made by the father, who wanted to change the child’s surname to add his surname, hyphenated with the mother’s surname.

The parents had been in a relationship, and had one child together, who was born in 2014.

The mother registered the child’s name, using her surname. The father was not included on the birth certificate, so did not have automatic parental responsibility.

In 2015 the father issued proceedings seeking a parental responsibility order, which was duly made in 2016.

Last year the father issued his change of name application.

After considering the matters referred to above the court decided to refuse the application.

The reasons for the refusal included the length of time that the child had been known by their present surname (any change of name application should ideally have been dealt with by the court in 2016) and, crucially, the fact that the child did not wish the name to be changed. The court was satisfied that the child’s wishes should be respected.

You can read the full report of the case here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Sakala / Shutterstock.com

Everyone who uses the Family Court will be affected by its workload. If the court has a high workload then cases will take longer to be dealt with, and this will be to the detriment of all concerned, especially all of the children waiting for their futures to be determined by the Court.

The current state of the court workload should therefore be of interest to all who are involved in, or are contemplating, Family Court proceedings.

And the best indication of the Court’s workload is provided in quarterly statistics published by the Ministry of Justice.

The latest statistics, for the period October to December 2023, have just been published, and the news is generally quite positive.

The statistics show that during that period there were decreases in the number of case starts for most case types, including matrimonial (divorce, civil partnership dissolution, judicial separation and nullity), domestic violence, public law children cases (i.e. cases involving social services) and private law children cases. There were, however, increases in financial remedy case starts.

The number of cases that have been concluded has also increased in most areas, but there has been a decrease in public law and private law children case disposals.

Overall, during 2023, there were 251,625 new cases started in family courts (excluding adoption, for which there are no figures), which was down 4% from 2022.

All of this appears to be good news, indicating that the pressure on the Family Court, which has been so high for so long, may at last be easing.

But the most important statistics for court users relate to how long cases are actually taking.

And here the news is rather less good.

Divorce proceedings are taking longer. In October to December 2023 the mean average time from application to conditional order was 42 weeks, which was up 4 weeks from the same quarter in 2022. And the mean average time from application to final order was 69 weeks, which was up 2 weeks from the same quarter in 2022.

The news for the timeliness of private law children cases was not much better. In October to December 2023, it took on average 46 weeks for private law cases to reach a final order, i.e. case closure, which was similar to the same period in 2022. But for 2023 overall, it took 46 weeks on average for private law cases to reach a final order, compared to 44 weeks in 2022.

Unfortunately, the statistics do not include figures for the timeliness of other types of cases, but management information published by HM Courts and Tribunals Service does include figures for the timeliness of public law children cases.

Those figures show that in January 2023 public law cases were taking an average of 41 weeks to be dealt with, which went down to 38 weeks by December 2023.

So all in all, rather mixed news for users of the Family Court.

You can find the latest quarterly Family Court statistics here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: fizkes / Shutterstock.com

When a financial remedies claim is made then both parties will be required by the court to file a Form E financial statement, setting out full details of their means, so that the court can decide upon a fair settlement.

But what if one party fails to file a Form E?

Well, there are various options available to the other party, but perhaps the most drastic is to seek the committal to prison of the party who has not complied with the requirement, for contempt of court.

This occurred in a recently-published judgment that was handed down by the High Court in London last October.

The judgment concerned an application by the wife in financial remedy proceedings for the committal to prison of the husband for contempt of court for his failure to comply with an order made in January 2023 requiring him to file a Form E by the 1st of May 2023.

The order had a ‘penal notice’ attached to it, warning the husband that he if he did not comply with the order he would be guilty of contempt, and may be committed to prison.

Despite this, the husband failed to comply with the order, and the wife therefore issued her application.

The application went before Mr Justice Moor. As he explained in his judgment, he had to be satisfied to the criminal standard of proof that the husband was in contempt, meaning that he had to be sure beyond reasonable doubt that he was in contempt.

In the event the husband accepted that he was in contempt, and accordingly the contempt was proved beyond reasonable doubt.

It therefore remained for Mr Justice Moor to decide upon the sentence to impose.

As he stated, there are two aspects to a sentence for contempt. The first is punishment for not having complied with an order, which is a very serious matter of itself. The second is to secure compliance with the order in the future.

Mr Justice Moor found that only a custodial sentence would be appropriate in this case, in view of the seriousness of the contempt.

However, he felt that a very important objective was to get a comprehensive Form E from the husband. He therefore decided that he should suspend the sentence of imprisonment.

Accordingly, he sentenced the husband to imprisonment for a total of 56 days, suspended on terms that the husband complete a comprehensive Form E setting out his financial position, within 28 days.

He also warned the husband that if there was a further contempt, the sentence was likely to be far longer, and be immediately imposed.

You can read the full report of the judgment here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Image: Georgian Bay Boudoir / Shutterstock.com

As we have often advised here, anyone involved in financial remedy proceedings on divorce should make every reasonable effort to settle the case by agreement, to avoid the time, stress and expense of contested proceedings. However, it has not been compulsory to put forward settlement proposals, at least until shortly before any final hearing.

Until now.

A new rule due to come into effect on the 6th of July will impose a duty upon parties to financial remedy proceedings to put forward settlement proposals at a much earlier stage in the case.

Shortly after a financial remedies application has been issued, and after both parties have made full disclosure of their means, the court will fix a Financial Dispute Resolution appointment (‘FDR’). The purpose of the FDR is to provide the parties with an opportunity to negotiate a final financial settlement, with the input and assistance of a judge.

The new rule provides that where the case has not been settled at the FDR the court can direct that the parties put forward open settlement proposals, by such date as the court directs. If the court does not make a direction, then the proposals must be put forward within 21 days after the date of the FDR appointment.

Family Law Cafe welcomes the new rule, in so far as it may lead to more cases being settled sooner. However, parties should obviously only be compelled to put forward settlement proposals once they have sufficient information to ascertain their entitlement, including information about the other party’s means, and valuations of all relevant assets.

If you are involved in financial remedy proceedings Family Law Cafe can assist. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Colin Watts on Unsplash

A High Court judge has urged a couple involved in a long-running divorce dispute over finances to try to settle the case to avoid further costs, which already run into the millions. Concluding his judgment in Goddard-Watts v Goddard-Watts Mr Justice Holman said: “I … most earnestly urge the parties to enter into serious negotiations and find an early basis for settlement, so that the vortex of profligate spending and mutual destruction finally ends.”

But how do you avoid such destructive litigation? How do you keep your divorce costs to a minimum?

Well, here are five things that you can do:

1. Obviously, and as Mr Justice Holman suggested, you should try to settle matters by agreement, if possible. This means both putting forward reasonable proposals, and responding to any reasonable proposals that the other party may make. In another recent case, a husband was criticised by the judge for failing to respond in a timely fashion to a settlement proposal made by the wife.

2. Do not be unnecessarily confrontational. Obviously, there can be a lot of animosity surrounding a divorce, but you should endeavour to avoid confrontation when trying to sort out the divorce settlement. Unnecessary confrontation can seriously diminish the chances of agreeing matters. Yes, there are times when you must ‘stand up for yourself’, but in general you should put your feelings to one side and adopt a constructive approach.

3. Consider mediation. If you are unable to reach agreement with your spouse through negotiation, consider going to mediation. Mediation is a process whereby an independent trained mediator will help the parties try to reach an agreement. (Note that mediation is completely voluntary, and not all cases are suitable, for example, most cases where there has been domestic violence.)

4. Be realistic. Many cases fail to settle simply because one or both of the parties have unrealistic expectations as to their entitlement. Of course, it is not always easy to know what is realistic and what is not. That is where our last recommendation comes in:

5. Get a good lawyer, and follow their advice. This is where we can help. Family Law Cafe can put you in touch with an expert family lawyer who will be able to advise you on your entitlement, and who will help you to reach an agreed settlement, by adopting a constructive, non-confrontational approach, wherever possible. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Michael Longmire on Unsplash

Five initial steps to take (or consider) to protect your financial position

Obviously, the breakdown of a marriage can be an extremely difficult time, not least because of the effect that it has upon your finances, and even your home. This can be especially so if your spouse, the main ‘breadwinner’, has just left you without making any financial provision.

What can you do in such circumstances to protect your financial position and your home?

Well, there are many things that you can do, but here are five steps that you either should or could take, or that you may consider:

1. Maintenance – If your spouse was the main breadwinner and has made no financial provision for you, then you may need to apply for maintenance. If you have dependent children then you can apply for child support maintenance via the Child Maintenance Service. You may also be able to apply to a court for maintenance for yourself, even if divorce proceedings have not begun.

2. Your home – What you can do to protect your home depends upon a number of things, but if it is owned then you may be concerned about paying the mortgage, or your spouse attempting to sell or remortgage the property. If your spouse is not paying the mortgage and you cannot afford to do so then you should contact your lender immediately, and explain the position to them. They may be prepared to agree to a ‘mortgage holiday’, temporarily suspending the mortgage payments. If the house is in joint names then your spouse will not be able to sell or remortgage it without your agreement, but if it is their sole name then you may need to protect your right to occupy the property at the Land Registry – this can help to stop your spouse from selling the house.

3. Joint accounts – Remember that your spouse will still have access to joint bank accounts. You may therefore wish to consider closing the account, or asking the bank to freeze it, to prevent your spouse from withdrawing money from it.

4. Change passwords – You may very well have online access to financial services such as banks, and other sites that use your financial details, such as online shops. Obviously, if your spouse is aware of your passwords, then they may be able to access and use these sites without your permission. You should therefore give consideration to changing your passwords to prevent this from happening.

5. Consult the right lawyer – Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, you need to obtain the best legal advice that you can. Family Law Cafe can put you in touch with an expert family lawyer who will be able to give you the advice you need, and help you to take any steps necessary to protect your finances and your home. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress. Family Law Cafe is your start-point for getting matters sorted with strategy, support and security.

Photo by Piotr Chrobot on Unsplash

A new study suggests that estranged fathers with an alleged or proven history of domestic abuse can use parental alienation claims to discredit mothers and gain parenting time with their children.

While there is no single definition of parental alienation, the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (‘Cafcass’) recognise it as ‘when a child’s resistance or hostility towards one parent is not justified and is the result of psychological manipulation by the other parent.’

The study, conducted by Dr Adrienne Barnett, a researcher at Brunel University London, examined all 40 reported and published private family law judgments in England and Wales, from 2000 to 2019, in which parental alienation was raised. This case law revealed a high incidence of domestic abuse perpetrated by parents (principally fathers) who were claiming that the resident parents (principally mothers) had alienated the children against them, raising questions about the purpose of parental alienation.

The study says that recently a parental alienation ‘industry’ appears to have amassed, comprising experts, therapists and lawyers, advocating transfers of children’s care from ‘alienating’ mothers to non-resident fathers, as well as parental alienation therapy for children and parents.

Dr Barnett commented:

“Playing the parental alienation card is proving more powerful than any other in silencing the voices of women and children resisting contact with abusive men. Parental alienation is not an equal counterpart to domestic abuse, it is a means of obscuring domestic abuse, and should be recognised as such.”

Parental alienation can be a very complex issue. If you believe that the other parent is alienating your child against you, or if you are being accused of alienating your child against them, then we would strongly suggest that you seek the advice of an expert family lawyer. Family Law Cafe can help you find that advice. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal.

Photo by Sandy Millar on Unsplash

After an extended Christmas and New Year break, we thought it would be a good idea to catch up on some of the family law-related news that has happened whilst we have been away.

Perhaps the biggest story is that the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, which will bring in a system of no-fault divorce, has been reintroduced to Parliament. The Bill was first introduced in June 2019, but was lost due to the General Election.

This is really welcome news. We have been waiting for many years for a system where it will never be necessary to blame the other party for the breakdown of the marriage in order to get a divorce. A no-fault system will reduce confrontation and its damaging effect upon children, thereby making it more likely that the parties will be able to agree arrangements regarding children and finances.

Moving on, the Master of the Rolls Sir Terence Etherton has said that family cases that reach the Court of Appeal should be broadcast online, to dispel fears about judicial prejudice. Speaking at an event organised by the UK Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists and Techbar, he said: “There are some family cases that are really important…and people want to know how we are doing things. The motive for live-streaming is people should be able to see how we are doing our job.”

An interesting idea, which could go some way towards improving public understanding of the way that the family courts work.

Finally, new Stalking Protection Orders (‘SPOs’) have come into force. SPOs will allow courts in England and Wales to move quicker to ban stalkers from contacting victims or visiting their home, place of work or study. In addition, SPOs can also force stalkers to seek professional help. The Orders will usually last for a minimum of 2 years, with a breach counting as a criminal offence that can result in up to 5 years in prison.

Again, we think that this is welcome news. SPOs are another tool that can be used to help protect victims of stalking.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Photo by Roman Kraft on Unsplash

The Ministry of Justice has published its latest quarterly statistics for the Family Court, for July to September 2019. The statistics show an increase in the number of cases started in the family courts.

In July to September 2019, 67,431 new cases started in family courts. This was up 1% on the equivalent quarter in 2018, and was due to a 23% rise in domestic violence cases started, along with increases in cases involving children.

The increase adds further to the pressure of work that the courts are under, and is obviously likely to result in cases taking longer. Indeed, the statistics show that children cases of all types are, on average, taking longer to be dealt with.

All of this of course makes it even more important that family disputes are resolved out out court if possible, avoiding lengthy and costly court proceedings.

And the good news is that there are a number of ways to avoid going to court. You can agree matters with the other party, either directly or through lawyers; you can go to mediation, where a trained mediator will help you try to reach agreement; you can try a collaborative approach, whereby the two sides and their lawyers work together to resolve matters; or you can go to arbitration, whereby a trained arbitrator will decide the case for you. For more details of these ways of resolving disputes, see this post.

If you would like any further information about resolving your family dispute out of court, Family Law Cafe can help. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

You can find the Family Court statistics here.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Photo by Rob Curran on Unsplash

A new statistical release by the Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’) has suggested that divorce centres are to blame for a significant decrease in the number of divorces, due to the time that they are taking to deal with them.

There were 90,871 divorces of opposite-sex couples in 2018, a decrease of 10.6% compared with 2017 and the lowest number since 1971.

However, the ONS say that recent Ministry of Justice statistics highlight an administrative reason behind the scale of this decrease: divorce centres processed a backlog of work in 2018 resulting in 8% more divorce petitions. The ONS expects this to translate into a higher number of completed divorces in 2019.

Divorce centres were established in 2015, replacing divorce county courts. The primary aim of the centres was to streamline the process of divorce, by having it dealt with at just eleven centres.

These are the latest figures, but Family Law Cafe has seen anecdotal evidence that suggests that at least some divorce centres are still taking far too long to deal with their caseloads.

Apart from simply meaning that it will take longer to get a divorce (which can of course be a cause of unnecessary further stress), the delays can also affect financial settlements, which do not usually take effect until the divorce has been finalised. This could potentially lead to financial hardship.

If you are worried about the effect of delay upon your divorce then you should seek expert advice. Family Law Cafe can help you find that advice. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

You can read the statistical release here.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Photo by Dušan Smetana on Unsplash

Christmas can be a fraught time for separated families with children. Having to split the festive season between two households can be extremely distressing for all concerned, especially if it is not handled with care.

Here are our five top tips for making the holiday season as stress-free as possible.

1. Agree arrangements with the other parent if you possibly can. Be aware that it is now almost certainly too late to ask the court to sort things out. The court will only be able to deal with urgent matters between now and Christmas, and will not usually consider a dispute over Christmas arrangements to be sufficiently urgent to deal with at short notice.

2. A very common arrangement is to alternate Christmas Day between the two households. For example, one year the children can spend Christmas Day with one parent and Boxing Day with the other, and then the arrangement is reversed the following year. Most children will be only too happy to have two Christmases! Of course, this is only possible if the parents live quite close to one another. If they live further apart, the arrangement could, for example, be to alternate the Christmas holidays between the two households.

3. If you remain on good terms with the other parent, and if neither parent has a new family, then consider spending Christmas Day with the children together. It can work, and the children will be only too happy to spend the day with both parents.

4. If the children do spend Christmas Day with only one parent, then allow them to speak to other parent during the day, whether by phone, social media, text messaging, or some other means. Most children will want to share the day with both parents as much as they can.

5. Lastly, and this may be a little too late already, make sure that you agree which parent buys which presents for the children. Most children these days have very specific wishes when it comes to presents, and there are few things more disappointing for a child at Christmas than receiving ‘repeat’ presents!

We hope that these tips are helpful, but whatever you do, enjoy Christmas with your children!

If you believe you have an urgent issue to resolve regarding Christmas arrangements for children, or if you would just like some would like legal advice on the subject, Family Law Cafe can help. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Baubles image by Horia Varlan (From Flickr), licensed under CC BY 2.0.

The Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’) has published its latest statistical release for domestic abuse prevalence and trends in England and Wales, for the year ending March 2019. And the figures make for harrowing reading.

Appropriately, the release was published on International Day For The Elimination Of Violence Against Women, although we should emphasise that men are also victims of domestic abuse.

Amongst the main points in the release were the following:

• That according to the Crime Survey for England and Wales for the year ending March 2019, an estimated 2.4 million people experienced domestic abuse in the last year. That equates to nearly 6% of all adults.

• That the police recorded a total of 1,316,800 domestic abuse-related incidents and crimes in the year ending March 2019, an increase of 118,706 from the previous year.

• That of these, 746,219 were recorded as domestic abuse-related crimes, an increase of 24% from the previous year.

The Crime Survey figure is not actually significantly different to the previous year, but still it demonstrates the shocking scale of the problem of domestic abuse. Clearly, we must all redouble our efforts to address the problem.

The police figures do show a significant increase, although this may be in part driven by general police improvements in offence-recording practices, as well as an increase in domestic abuse-related incidents coming to the attention of the police. The increase could also indicate an increased willingness of victims to come forward to report domestic abuse.

You can find the ONS statistical release here.

For further information about how you can protect yourself from domestic abuse, see this post. If you would like to know more about protecting yourself from domestic violence and abuse, or if you would like to apply for a court order, Family Law Café can help. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal.

Photo by Sydney Sims on Unsplash

Sometimes, even with the best intentions, a divorce can ‘go bad’. Acrimony and bitterness can creep in, and before you know it you are involved in lengthy, expensive and stressful contested court proceedings. Allegations may fly, there may be recriminations and bad feelings, which can leave scars that may never really heal.

Here are our five top tips for dealing with such a scenario.

1. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, get the best legal advice you can. A good lawyer will, for example, advise against unnecessarily contesting divorce proceedings, and will advise as to what is a reasonable settlement, thereby ensuring you do not waste time, effort and money pursuing unrealistic expectations. Family Law Cafe can help you find the advice you need.

2. Stay calm, and don’t let your emotions get the better of you. It is all too easy to allow your emotions to cloud your judgement, especially if you are being goaded by the other party. But this is a trap that too many people fall into. No good will come of following your emotions – as difficult as it may be, you must put them to one side.

3. Never stop trying to resolve matters by agreement. If you can’t reach an agreement with the other party, then the court will eventually decide the matter. However, you would be surprised what cases are settled. Often, a case that appears to have no prospect whatsoever of reaching settlement is agreed, saving the parties the stress, time and expense of a contested hearing.

4. Be prepared for the long haul. It may seem that there is no end in sight to the proceedings, but they will end. Do not give up. Do not be tempted to settle on the other party’s terms, just to bring the matter to an early conclusion.

5. Lastly, follow your lawyer’s advice! It may sound obvious, but sometimes it can be difficult to accept that the path you are being directed down by your lawyer is the best one. It is easy to think you know best, but your judgement may be clouded by your feelings. A good lawyer will give you the best advice, without fear or favour.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Photo by Ryan Johns on Unsplash.

We have written here about this before, but the divorce of TV presenter Ant McPartlin and his wife Lisa Armstrong continues to provide valuable lessons for anyone going through a divorce, including those who do not enjoy such celebrity status.

Here are two quotes from a story about the divorce that appeared in the popular press this week:

“Ant McPartlin’s estranged wife ‘rejects multi-million pound divorce settlement in favour of taking him to court so they can settle their differences in public’”

And:

“Lisa Armstrong ‘still wants her day in court’”

We cannot comment upon the accuracy of these statements, but they do demonstrate popular misconceptions about how the courts deal with financial remedy claims on divorce, and about how best to pursue such claims.

Firstly, financial remedy hearings are not necessarily heard in public. In fact, the starting-point is that they are held in private, meaning that the general public have no right to be present. Members of the press are generally entitled to be present, but the court may restrict what they can report.

The second lesson is that insisting upon having your ‘day in court’ is almost certainly not the best way to resolve a claim. In fact, the court itself will try to encourage the parties to settle before the matter reaches a final hearing, and will take a dim view of anyone who does not make a reasonable effort to settle.

You can never guarantee that you will receive a more favourable settlement if you go to court, and there is of course the additional issue of the legal costs to consider. Far better to make every reasonable effort to settle the case by agreement, possibly via mediation.

If you require detailed advice regarding a financial remedies claim, Family Law Café can help you find it. To contact us, click the Contact link above and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image of Anthony McPartli

The Family Procedure Rules Committee has just closed its consultation on whether “secret” offers parties make to settle a case during financial proceedings can later be used in an argument for costs when a party gets a better result at trial.  The committee asked the question – should “without prejudice subject to costs” letters be admissible when the court considers conduct?  By conduct it meant litigation conduct because this is the only basis upon which a court can make a costs order at trial.

Up until 2006 parties would send each other offer letters, say, accepting 40% of the equity of a property, £2,000 pm maintenance for 5 years and a pension share of 30%.  These offers were headed “without prejudice save as to costs” and called Calderbank offers after a case of the same name.  If, at trial, a party got a better result, then they would show the judge the letter after the hearing and obtain their costs from 28 days after the offer.  It gave parties a strong incentive to settle the case but could end up upsetting the outcome the judge had sought to achieve and led to satellite litigation trying to work out whether the offer had actually been beaten.

The rules were changed so that the general rule was that each party should meet its own costs except when there had been litigation conduct.  This included pursuing an unreasonable case but did not allow a party to let the court know about these “secret” offer letters.  Over the years there was concern at the amount of cases going to hearing with one party failing to negotiate and a reasonable party running up costs it could not recover.

Senior Judges expressed different views about whether Calderbank letters should come back, Mostyn LJ calling a return to the old process “retrograde” and the process of changing a carefully crafted outcome with a costs order “unconscionable” in 2014 whereas Francis J said in 2018, “I fear that there are cases where litigants now feel able to continue without the sanction of costs, save in cases of serious litigation misconduct”. 

To help meet this problem the rules were changed in May 2019 so that a party refusing to openly negotiate reasonably and responsibly could have a costs order made against them.  The Law Society made the point that this rule change has yet to “bed down”.

The response of the Law Society is a cautious “yes” to the re-introduction of the use of these letters as it thinks it will help promote settlement and prevent so many cases going to final hearing, however does not agree that failing to beat the “secret” offer should be considered as conduct.  Instead the Law Society wants to see a separate category or head of opportunity for a costs order to be made with a new bespoke set of costs rules and Practice Direction.  It points out the difference in considering an application in a needs case (in which there is not enough money to go around) and in a sharing case (when there is) so that the object of fairness is retained. The Law Society wants the consideration of a costs order to remain discretionary with no return to the pre-2006 rules.

The Law Society noted the difficulties for litigants in person with a regime in which the nuances of winning and losing (i.e. winning some terms and losing on other terms) would have a huge impact on people struggling on their own with the legal system.  It pointed out that the current costs forms need improving and that it may be relevant for parties to give the costs they have spent on the divorce and children aspect of their issues.

Family Law Café sees this as an area of huge complexity and importance, and notes that, whilst the Rules Committee framed the question as a simple one in which they wanted a yes/no answer with reasons, the Law Society could not fairly answer within those confines.  Family Law Café will report further when the rules committee make their decision.  In the meantime we will continue to offer our brand of secure, impartial assistance to help you navigate through the difficulties of your family law case.

This post was written by Joanna Toch, the founder and CEO of Family Law Café.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe offers a modern, agile and compassionate approach to family law, giving you a helping hand when you need it and guiding you through the complexities of this difficult and stressful area.

Photo by Philip Veater on Unsplash.

Both the Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, which was to introduce a system of no-fault divorce, and the Domestic Abuse Bill, which was to introduce a comprehensive package of measures to tackle domestic abuse, will fall when Parliament is dissolved tomorrow, in advance of the General Election.

The Divorce Bill had its first reading in the House of Lords on the 15th of October, having had to be re-introduced after Parliament was prorogued, and the Domestic Abuse Bill had reached the Committee stage. It must now be hoped that both Bills will be re-introduced in the next session of Parliament, when they will have to start again from scratch.

What does this mean in practice?

As for the Divorce Bill, it means that we will now have to wait at least a little longer until we reach the position where it will no longer be necessary to attribute blame for the breakdown of a marriage. The worst affected by the delay will perhaps be those who are unable to divorce until they have been separated from their spouse for five years – such a wait would not have been necessary under the new law.

As for the Domestic Abuse Bill, the delay (as we hope it will be) will simply mean that victims of domestic abuse will have to wait longer before they benefit from the additional protection that the Bill would have afforded them. For example, the Bill would have included provisions prohibiting the cross-examination in court of an abuse victim by the alleged perpetrator of the abuse.

What can be done to mitigate the effect of the loss of these Bills?

Firstly, it is essential that we keep up the pressure for change, on whatever government takes office after the General Election. We must ensure that these vital reforms are not lost and, indeed, that they are brought forward as soon as possible.

Secondly, both those contemplating divorce proceedings and those who are victims of domestic abuse should seek the best possible advice, to ensure that they take the best options, and obtain the best protection that the current law can offer. Family Law Cafe can help you find that advice. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe’s accessible team of legal experts from various disciplines expedites the customer’s case and keeps them informed and in control 24/7 through a unique and secure online portal.

Image: Polling Station, by secretlondon123, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

A woman in America who was ordered to pay a lump sum of $7,500 (about £5,800) to her ex-husband, who she claimed  had been unfaithful to her, has made the payment entirely in 10 cent coins. The coins filled ten boxes, and weighed some 350 pounds.

It is, we suppose, one way to get even, although we wouldn’t recommend it to our clients! The woman was reportedly shocked that she had to pay money to her ex-husband, when (she claims) he had had an affair with another woman.

However, the story demonstrates something that is equally true on this side of the Atlantic: that the behaviour of the other party has little or no bearing upon the divorce settlement. Just because the other party has committed adultery, that does not mean that the court will reduce its award. And just because the other party has behaved unreasonably, that does not mean that they will get less.

Conduct will only be taken into account in a divorce settlement if it the court considers that the conduct is such that it would be inequitable to disregard it. This means that the conduct must be considerably more serious than the ‘usual’ ‘misconduct’, including adultery, involved in the breakdown of many marriages.

It is very rare for the court to find that conduct should be taken into account. Amongst the reported cases are one in which the wife shot the husband, one in which the husband commited incest with children of the family, and one in which the wife incited others to murder the husband.

Note that there are two other types of misconduct that are more common. Financial misconduct, where one party dissipates the assets of the parties, may result in a larger award for the other party, and litigation misconduct, where a party fails to cooperate with the court proceedings, may result in a costs order being made against that party.

For more information on this subject, you should consult a specialist family lawyer. Family Law Cafe can help you get the advice you need. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.

Image: Coins 4, by Nicholas LabyrinthX, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Lady Justice King has criticised a couple for incurring in excess of £500,000 in legal costs on court proceedings connected with their divorce. As a result of those costs, a judge at an earlier hearing said, there was no way that the couple’s ‘comfortable lifestyle’ could be maintained.

Handing down a judgment in the Court of Appeal, Lady Justice King said:

“This is yet another case where a highly educated couple with young children has engaged in lengthy, destructive and disproportionate legal proceedings. These disputes have continued for over five years with emotionally bruising and expensive litigation in relation to both money and the children of the marriage. The present appeal is a second appeal in the financial remedy proceedings. The costs to date are in excess of £500,000. The only substantial asset in the case, a flat in Panama, has a net value of only £298,377. As a consequence, as the District Judge said in his first instance judgment: “There is no way that the parties’ comfortable lifestyle can be maintained. Much of this has been caused by the intolerable burden of costs”.”

As Lady Justice King indicated, this sort of scenario is all too common, with feuding couples so intent upon seeking what they believe to be ‘justice’ that they lose sight of the costs that they are incurring (for another example, see this post). Often, in financial disputes following divorce those costs can be so high that not enough money is left to provide for the needs of the parties. Sometimes, the costs will even use up all of the assets, leaving the parties with nothing.

So how is such a scenario to be avoided?

Well, there are many ways, including simply keeping a close tab upon how much the costs are, resolving matters by agreement or through mediation, and even doing some of the work yourself, rather than pay for a lawyer to do it for you. If you would like further advice about these and other methods of avoiding excessive legal costs, Family Law Cafe can help. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

You can read Lady Justice King’s full judgment here.

  • *          *          *

Family Law Cafe provides a genuinely tailored technology-based service, allowing customers to be as involved or as removed as they wish, and to benefit from as much or as little support as they require.

Image: Money down the drain, by Images Money, licensed under CC BY 2.0.

Reform of divorce law is back on the parliamentary agenda, according to the Queen’s Speech on Monday.

The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill, which aimed to bring in a system of no-fault divorce, failed to complete its passage through Parliament before the end of the last parliamentary session, and was not carried over to the next session. This meant that it would make no further progress.

Family lawyers had feared that this could mean the end of this important reform, that would do so much to reduce animosity in divorce. However, the Government has indicated in the Queen’s Speech that it still intends to go ahead with the Bill.

The relevant part of the Speech read:

“My Government will bring forward measures to protect individuals, families and their homes. Legislation will transform the approach of the justice system and other agencies to victims of domestic abuse, and minimise the impact of divorce, particularly on children.”

You can read the full Queen’s Speech here.

Family Law Cafe welcomes this news, although cautions that there is unlikely to be sufficient time for the Bill to pass in the current parliamentary session, in which case it will have to wait until after a general election.

Meanwhile, anyone wishing to initiate divorce proceedings will have to do so under the current law. If you would like any further advice about this, Family Law Café can help. To book a free initial consultation with us click the green button at the top of this page and fill in the form, or call us on 020 3904 0506.

*          *          *

Family Law Cafe surrounds and supports the customer with both legal and pastoral care, end to end, from top barristers to case workers to therapists and mediators, to help the customer get the best possible result with the minimum stress.