The following Family practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
When any court determines any question with respect to:
the upbringing of the child, or
the administration of the child's property or the application of any income arising from it
the child's welfare shall be the court's paramount consideration.
The court has to treat the child's welfare as its paramount consideration, not its 'first and paramount consideration', as was the case under the previous provisions. It was not, however, intended to lead to a change of practice. The paramountcy principle is regarded as reflecting the previous well-established position summarised in a leading case as:
'A process whereby, when all the relevant facts, relationships, claims and wishes of parents, risks, choices and other circumstances are taken into account and weighed, the course to be followed will be that which is most in the interests of the child's welfare as that term has now to be understood. That is the first consideration because of its first importance and the paramount consideration because it rules upon or determines the course to be followed.'
In interpreting the paramountcy principle and in light of HRA 1998, respect must also be given to other persons' rights, eg parents, though where the child's interests conflict with the parents' the child's interests should prevail.
See Practice Note: Conflicting interests and human rights.
Clarke Hall and Morrison on Children
Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK
Complete all the fields above to proceed to the next step.
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Directors’ remunerationCompany directors are not, by virtue only of their office as director, automatically entitled under company law to remuneration for services as a director or to reimbursement of expenses incurred in rendering such services. Power to pay directors remuneration for their
Skeleton argumentsThis Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further below.Note: this Practice Note does not
IP COMPLETION DAY: 11pm (GMT) on 31 December 2020 marks the end of the Brexit transition/implementation period entered into following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. At this point in time (referred to in UK law as ‘IP completion day’), key transitional arrangements come to an end and significant
Derivative claim—what it is and when to use itA guide to specific terminology used in this Practice Note is provided—see below.What is a derivative claim?A derivative claim (or derivative action) is a claim brought or continued by a shareholder on behalf of the company in relation to a breach of
0330 161 1234