Prohibited steps orders

Prohibited steps orders

A prohibited steps order may be made under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989). It is an order that provides that no step that could be taken by a parent in meeting their parental responsibility for a child, and that is of a kind specified in the order, shall be taken by any person without the consent of the court. A prohibited steps order is concerned with a single specific issue and imposes a restriction, for example, on changing a child's surname, removing a child from the UK (where there is no child arrangements order (CAO) in force) or in connection with the medical treatment of a child.

See Practice Note: Prohibited steps orders.

When considering an application for a prohibited steps order the child's welfare will be the court's paramount consideration and it will have regard to the statutory checklist. The court will also have to be satisfied that it would be better for the child to make an order than not.

See Practice Notes: Private children—paramountcy of the child's welfare and The statutory checklist.

The

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