Special considerations

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

Contributions

In most cases, an attempt to undertake a detailed analysis of the parties’ contributions will be specifically excluded by the court. The fact that one party was the breadwinner and one the homemaker should not, by itself, provide any justification for a departure from the sharing principle. Such an approach would be discriminatory, per White v White [2000] 2 FLR 981.

Only in exceptional cases will a contribution over and above that which would normally be found, financial or otherwise, be a factor.

See Practice Note: Contributions of the parties. The following Precedent letter may be sent by practitioners to their clients: Financial applications to the court—client guide.

Special contribution

In a vanishingly small fraction of cases, special contribution may be taken into account. The test has been likened to the test for conduct (per Baroness Hale of Richmond in Miller v Miller, McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24, [2006] 1 FLR 1186), ie where the disparity in the contributions of the parties to the welfare of the family are such that they would be 'inequitable to disregard', they should be

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

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Family News

Correct timescales and the procedure for applications for permission to appeal (Re F (A Minor) (Permission To Appeal))

Family analysis: Mr Justice Hayden gave consideration to the requirements, including timescales, on an application for permission to appeal made to the trial judge and after considering the relevant case law and procedural rules provided guidance on the correct approach, together with wording to be included in judgments to ensure certainty as to the date of hand-down for the purposes of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010). Teertha Gupta, KC at 4PB, summarises the approach.

The necessity of a DOLs order where all parties with parental responsibility consent (J (through his Children's Guardian) v Bath and North East Somerset Council and others)

Family analysis: The Court of Appeal held that even in cases where the local authority and the parents of a profoundly disabled 14-year-old agreed to a restrictive regime for him, contrary to the decision of Mr Justice Lieven in the court below, a deprivation of liberty (DOLs) order was necessary, as Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) was engaged. Had the decision of Lieven J been allowed to stand, the logical consequence would have been that there would have been no need for any local authority to apply for a DOLs order where it holds a care order for the child. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and gave clear guidance that a local authority cannot 'mark its own homework'. Teertha Gupta KC at 4PB considers the issues.

Principles applicable by Court of Protection for recognition and enforcement of Scottish Guardianship order (Argyll and Bute Council v RF)

Private Client analysis: The case concerns a guardianship order made in Scotland in January 2025 for three years in respect of RF. There were two issues in the case. The first was whether the guardianship order gave Argyll and Bute Council (‘the Local Authority’) the power to authorise the deprivation of RF’s liberty in England. The second issue was, if so, whether the Court of Protection in England and Wales should grant recognition and enforcement of the guardianship order as applied for by the Local Authority. The Official Solicitor on behalf of RF opposed the application on the grounds that there was no effective route for RF to challenge his confinement or trigger a review of the restrictions on him. In dealing with these arguments the court gave a useful analysis of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) as applied to any specific guardianship order. Written by Lynne Counsell, barrister at Addington Chambers.

President of the Family Division delivers speech on changes and future priorities

The President of the Family Division, Sir Andrew McFarlane, has delivered a speech at the 2025 Resolution Conference reflecting on decades of change in family justice, recent achievements and future priorities. Through collaborative effort, Sir Andrew reflected that the system has achieved a reduction of approximately 20% in public law cases and 30% in private law cases from Covid-era highs.

View Family by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Child support—children with special needs

Child support—children with special needsThe court retains jurisdiction to make orders for maintenance where a personal independence payment is paid to or in respect of a child, or where a child is disabled. A child is regarded as disabled if the child is 'blind, deaf or dumb or is substantially and

Which financial statement should I use: Form E, Form E1 or Form E2?

Which financial statement should I use: Form E, Form E1 or Form E2?The court form prescribed financial statement is used to set out each party's relevant financial and other circumstances when a financial application has been made. Both parties are required to simultaneously exchange with each

Pension sharing orders

Pension sharing ordersThis Practice Note explains what a pension sharing order is within family proceedings and sets out which pension rights can be shared and which cannot be shared. It also sets out the key features of a pension sharing order including pension credits and pension debits, variation

Notice to show cause applications in family proceedings

Notice to show cause applications in family proceedingsIf one party considers that an agreement has been reached (usually in relation to financial arrangements between the parties), or an agreement was made but one party seeks to resile from it, the party relying on an agreement reached between the
Child support—children with special needs

Child support—children with special needs

Child support—children with special needsThe court retains jurisdiction to make orders for maintenance where a personal independence payment is paid to or in respect of a child, or where a child is disabled. A child is regarded as disabled if the child is 'blind, deaf or dumb or is substantially and

Which financial statement should I use: Form E, Form E1 or Form E2?

Which financial statement should I use: Form E, Form E1 or Form E2?

Which financial statement should I use: Form E, Form E1 or Form E2?The court form prescribed financial statement is used to set out each party's relevant financial and other circumstances when a financial application has been made. Both parties are required to simultaneously exchange with each

Pension sharing orders

Pension sharing orders

Pension sharing ordersThis Practice Note explains what a pension sharing order is within family proceedings and sets out which pension rights can be shared and which cannot be shared. It also sets out the key features of a pension sharing order including pension credits and pension debits, variation

Notice to show cause applications in family proceedings

Notice to show cause applications in family proceedings

Notice to show cause applications in family proceedingsIf one party considers that an agreement has been reached (usually in relation to financial arrangements between the parties), or an agreement was made but one party seeks to resile from it, the party relying on an agreement reached between the