Methods of enforcement

The Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955 offer two routes to enforcement:

  1. an application may be made to the court for a specific method of enforcement, or

  2. an application may be made for such method of enforcement as the court considers appropriate

See Practice Note: Enforcement of financial orders.

In most cases, the provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998, SI 1998/3132 (CPR), as modified by FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, Pt 33, apply to enforcement in family proceedings. FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, Pt 37 applies in relation to applications and proceedings in relation to contempt of court and FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, Pts 39 and 40, together with FPR 2010, PD 40A, apply in relation to attachment of earnings, charging orders, stop orders and stop notices.

Standard orders in relation to enforcement have been issued as part of the standard orders project initiated by the President of the Family Division, see Practice Notes: Standard orders—enforcement and Standard orders—committal.

Attachment of earnings

An attachment of earnings order is only of use where the debtor is employed. On an application

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Family News

High Court judgment demonstrates usefulness of section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 in Schedule 1 claims (Re P (A Child) (Financial Provision))

Family analysis: In this Schedule 1 case the mother received, for her son’s benefit: a housing fund of nearly £1m (the property to be held on trust); child maintenance (including ‘HECSA’/carer’s allowance) until completion of his first degree; and lump sums in respect of his capital needs and her own substantial liabilities (chiefly relating to her unpaid legal fees). The father (whose resources could be measured in the ‘tens of millions of pounds’) had sought to prejudice the mother’s claims via transferring his valuable shares to family members, who then transferred the same into a trust structure (settled under Czech law). A further onwards transfer was then made of the trust’s assets into a Liechtenstein foundation. Inferences were drawn by the court in respect of the level of the father’s wealth, and specifically as to the value of the transferred shares. Detailed findings were made against him in respect of the identified transactions, which had been the focus of the mother’s section 423 application. Although a section 423(2) order was not actually made, the application was adjourned pending the father’s compliance with the award, with security in the sum of £600,000 also ordered, alongside a continuation of the freezing orders made earlier in the proceedings. David Wilkinson, solicitor at Slater Heelis, considers the issues.

View Family by content type :

Popular documents