The court will not have jurisdiction in relation to child maintenance unless section 8 of the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) applies. An application can only be made to the court for a ‘top-up’ maintenance order where a maintenance calculation has been undertaken by the Child Maintenance Service (CMS), and the non-resident parent’s (NRP) gross income exceeds £3,000 per week, where the formula introduced by the Child Maintenance and Other Payments Act 2008 applies. CSA 1991, s 8(6) specifically refers to a maintenance calculation being in force, ie (emphasis added): ‘(6) This section shall not prevent a court from exercising

If the amount of child maintenance has been agreed in a consent order, the court can make an order for periodical payments in the same amount, notwithstanding the restrictions placed upon its jurisdiction by section 8 of the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991). If such an order has been made, neither party may apply to the CMS for a period of 12 months beginning with the date of the order (see CSA 1991, s 4(10)(aa)). The court can vary this order where a variation application would be justified but the existence of a varied order would only prevent an application to the CMS for a period of 12

The rules in respect of private law proceedings relating to children are largely contained in Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 12 and the accompanying FPR 2010, PD 12B, the Child Arrangements Programme. FPR 2010, PD 12B applies where a dispute arises between separated parents and/or families about arrangements concerning children. Its stated purpose is to assist families to reach safe and child-focussed agreements for their child, where possible out of the court setting or by consent. FPR 2010, PD 12B also applies to any family proceedings in the Family Court or the High Court in which an application is made for a child arrangements order (CAO), in which any question arises about where a child should live, or about contact between a child and a parent or other family member, where the court considers

In this Q&A, it is presumed that the courts of England and Wales have accepted jurisdiction in respect of the divorce and consequential financial remedy proceedings under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973). It should be noted that in many cases where the parties have a connection with another jurisdiction, there is a risk of a jurisdictional dispute. Once the English courts have accepted jurisdiction, the starting point is that they will exercise their powers and functions under the MCA 1973 regardless of where the parties are from or where assets are based. As Thorpe LJ stated in Dart v Dart: ‘If the Family Division takes jurisdiction on the application of the principles in De Dampierre v De Dampierre [1988] AC 92 then, no matter where the parties originate

Mediation is a process by which an independent qualified mediator works with a couple to help them come to a mutual agreement. One of the main features of mediation is a distinction drawn between financial information (which is open) and negotiations (which are without prejudice). This is to enable options to be explored freely without concern that the discussions may be used in any court proceedings. The open information can be commuted into the court process if the mediation breaks down to avoid the duplication of costs. If parties decide they wish to be engaged in the mediation process, and the mediator agrees that it is suitable, the parties will then go through the agreement to mediate (see Precedent: Agreement to mediate: BFLS 6E [21004]) and everybody will sign it—this is a contract

Where a couple subsequently reconciles and remarries, in the event they were to separate again, and a fresh application would made for financial relief, and the court would not be bound to make an order identical to the order made following the breakdown of the first marriage. Section 25(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) states that the court when deciding to exercise its powers shall ‘have regard to all the circumstances of the case’, which will include the outcome

Under section 7 of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 regulations can be made prescribing terms as to the maintenance, repair and insurance of fixed equipment (these are known as 'the model clauses') in respect of agricultural holdings. The model clauses are deemed to be incorporated in every contract of tenancy of an

Contractual claims There is no requirement that the agreement settling a contractual claim must be in a particular form; since the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (ETA 1996) (under which the [Employment Tribunals] Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, SI 1994/1623 was re-enacted) does not include any prohibition against contracting out, the position regarding settlement is the same as with comparable proceedings in the civil courts; there is no need for such a contract to be drawn up by a conciliation officer or to be in the form of a settlement agreement. However, settlement of a contractual claim must be contained in a binding contract, ie there must be offer and acceptance, an intention to create legal relations and certainty (there is no requirement for consideration in Scots contract law). For further information, see: Formation and interpretation—overview and the Practice Notes referred to in that overview. Statutory

On 11 January 2018, the Immigration Rules were amended so that partners of Points-Based System migrants who are applying for indefinite leave to remain on that basis are now subject to the same absences requirement as main applicants. This only applies to those who are in categories which lead to settlement, and who are granted leave on or after this date (whether initial leave or an extension). See ‘Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules, HC 309—analysis—Part 5 and PBS categories that lead to settlement’ in Practice Note: Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules, HC 309—analysis, and ‘Partners of Points-Based System and Appendix W migrants—Applying

If the child maintenance service (CMS) has jurisdiction in respect of child maintenance then it will calculate maintenance in accordance with the statutory formula. Where the CMS has jurisdiction, the court has no jurisdiction to hear a contested application for child maintenance. However, the CMS does not have jurisdiction if either the non-resident parent (the payer) or the person with care of the qualifying child (the payee) is not habitually resident in the UK, as in the scenario of this Q&A, pursuant to section 44 of the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) (unless the payer falls into one of the exceptions listed under CSA 1991, s 44(2A)). See

A person acting under a power of attorney has the same status as the donor of the power would have if applying personally, except that a chain of executorship is not constituted through the attorney, though it is not finally broken. The chain revives if and when the executor obtains probate of their testator's Will (section 7(3) of the Administration of Estates Act 1925). Appointment of attorneys and delegation The appointment of attorneys is provided for by section 25 of the Trustee Act 1925 (as amended by the Trustee Delegation Act 1999). A power of attorney given by a PR may last for a maximum of 12 months and notice must be given to the co-PRs within seven days of it being granted. A sole co-PR may be appointed. A

There are various ways in which a divorce petition may be served. In the first instance, petitions will usually be served by first class post along with an acknowledgment of service. Where the respondent has a solicitor acting for them and the applicant has been notified in writing that the solicitor is instructed by the respondent to accept service of the application, then service may also be by way of document exchange (Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, 6.11). In the event the respondent is not represented and their address is unknown, or the acknowledgment of service is not returned, a divorce petition may be served by way of personal service in accordance with FPR 2010, SI 2010/2955, 6.7. The server will need to file a certificate of service (Form FP6) with the court stating