Family Law & Divorce Law Blog by James Maguire

US organisation World Congress of Families (WCF) was due to hold its annual conference at the Law Society HQ in London on 23 May. However the Law Society has recently cancelled the booking, provoking fierce debate on equality issues.

As reported in The Telegraph over the weekend, CEO Desmond Hudson explained that it had come to their attention that the WCF conference agenda 'sat uncomfortably' with the Law Society's diversity & equality policy.

There were concerns that theme of the conference, entitled 'One Man. One Woman. Making the case for marriage, for the good of society', could be interpreted as opposing same-sex marriage. Although same-sex marriage in not currently legal in the UK, a consultation on this issue is underway.

WCF, established in 1997, describes itself as a non-religious group. However Christian Concern is a member and major sponsor, and has suggested that the Law Society's cancellation of the conference 'is censoring debate on a major change in the law that will inevitably have massive consequences for society'. There have been allegations that the cancellation on the grounds of equality is in itself a 'misreading of the Equality Act'.

Senior High Court judge Sir Paul Coleridge was due to be the main speaker at the event. As reported in The Telegraph In April, Sir Paul recently established independent charity The Marriage Foundation, hailed as the 'gold standard for relationships', Sir Paul has described marriage and family breakdown as 'one of the most destructive scourges of our time'.

Despite the introduction of Civil Partnerships back in 2004, which (for example) provides same-sex civil partners with the same financial remedies as married partners, there appears to be renewed and growing public support for the traditional institution of marriage.

Aside from Sir Paul Coleridge, The Marriage Foundation counts a number of high profile family judges and lawyers among its patrons and founding supporters. Yet there is no reference on its website to same-sex partners, which begs the question as to whether gay marriage will find support among the senior judiciary during the consultation.

If any of these issues concern you, or you need advice on marital or civil partnership issues, please contact Helen on 01625 544 657 or at helen.miller@family-law.co.uk,

On Wednesday the Queen announced the new Children and Families Bill at the state opening of Parliament. Included in the bill are many welcome changes for families, including improved parental leave and flexible working.

Many of the measures derive from the comprehensive Family Justice Review, published in November 2011. The Review examined the current system, which it worryingly referred to as a 'slow building crisis'.

Whilst the interests of children are central to the family justice system, the review made a number of recommendations to improve current failings, including the development of coherent, national standards. The review placed particular emphasis on the needs of children under the care of the local authority, for example by speeding up the adoption process.

Also in the Queen's Speech was the Crime & Courts Bill, which includes the introduction of a single family court for England & Wales.

Last night we attended a seminar at the Manchester Civil Justice Centre given by Mr Justice Ryder, the judge charged with overhauling the family justice system. The judge explained that the changes will be radical bringing in a more hands-on approach from judges, designed to eliminate delay and generally improve the experience of those involved with the Family Courts.

The proposed legislation outlined in the Queen's Speech is the gateway to a new era for Family Law. As practitioners we are often frustrated by the failings of the current system; at last there is cause for optimism that the needs of families in crisis will now properly be met.

If you would like to discuss a family issue, contact Helen on 01625 544 657 or at helen.miller@family-law.co.uk for an informal chat, or to arrange a free, initial consultation at a time to suit you.

A senior Judge of the Courts of England and Wales is so concerned about family breakdown that he has launched a campaign to champion marriage as the ‘gold standard of relationships’.

The ‘Marriage Foundation’, which is designed to assist couples in understanding the nature, benefits and importance of marriage, was launched in London this week.

So what happens if your marriage does not reach this desired ‘gold standard’?

Couples can experience a variety of difficulties within a marriage, many of which may be resolved with the assistance of communication and understanding. But what happens if you really are struggling and feel like there is nowhere further to go?

The first port of call is not always divorce; there are a number of other avenues which you may wish to explore first such as counselling, mediation or perhaps even the ‘Marriage Foundation’ can assist and help in resolving your difficulties and re-building your relationship.

If, however, you are finding that the difficulties and problems will not go away, you may wish to consider the best way forward to include a separation or divorce. We at James Maguire & Co. appreciate that the words ‘separation’ and ‘divorce’ can be extremely daunting and so even if you have not yet reached this point but would simply like to discuss your options, we would be happy to assist.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

Expats living in Dubai are over four times more likely to divorce than Emiratis, The Telegraph online reported yesterday.

The reasons for this are varied and complex, but most agree that expat couples who spend frequent periods apart run a greater risk of infidelity. Maintaining links with the UK, whether by caring for elderly relatives or children still at school here, puts enormous pressure on relationships.

Sadly, loneliness, stress and even boredom can often be features of expat life. It is little wonder therefore that expats appear more vulnerable to marital conflict than others.

Soaring divorce rates in Dubai in particular have been attributed in part to the worldwide financial crisis, as families are no longer able to maintain the glamorous lifestyle enjoyed previously.

However, unreasonable behaviour arising from financial pressures is one of the most frequently cited reasons for a relationship breakdown, whether in Dubai or the UK.

If you would like to discuss any of these issues with a divorce expert, please contact Helen Miller for an informal chat or to arrange a free initial consultation, on 01625 544 657 or helen.miller@family-law.co.uk.

It has been recently announced that there are plans to shake-up the family justice system to ensure that Fathers get improved access to their children after the breakdown of a marriage.

The Government is planning to draw up plans to amend The Children Act 1989 to address legal rights for children and their parents to allow for more equal access following the breakdown of a marriage. The plans include placing a legal duty on Courts to ensure that both parents are given access to their children in divorce settlements.

This of course is not a new development. A review led by former civil servant David Norgorve last year rejected the need for any legal statement of rights and it appears that this new plan will also face opposition despite the apparent support by the deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg and Iain Duncan Smith, the Welfare Secretary.

The Department of Education has said that the new rules will be “much clearer that it is vital for children to have an on-going relationship with both parents.” However, there is concern that the new rules will disappoint Fathers and Father’s rights campaigners as it is doubtful that the rules will give any legal guarantee of equal access. It is understood that there are concerns about promoting automatic shared care following a change of law in Australia which was designed to promote shared parenting and resulted in delays in proceedings as parents often viewed shared parenting to mean a 50:50 division of the time that the child spent with each parent. There therefore seems to be concerns that this would occur in the UK Courts when the Courts are specifically trying to reduce the amount of time that children are involved in proceedings.

There are concerns about providing a “blanket” of rights when every case is different and therefore should be determined on the individual facts. However, there is a counter argument in that legal rights of access can be brought in with the provision of allowing the Court to use its discretion in appropriate cases.

Parents and legal practitioners will therefore have to wait until the proposed reforms are published to see whether there is any substance to these proposals and whether a reform will actually take place to give parents equal access to children upon divorce. An update will follow as soon as new information is released.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.co.uk

The matrimonial home is often the most valuable asset in the marriage. When parties separate or divorce, it is very important to be able to identify how much the property is worth.

A local firm of Estate Agents might be able to give an indication of what the property may sell for in the current market. However, care needs to be taken because the value indicated could be slightly inflated simply to obtain your business in selling the home.

In many divorce cases, a professional valuer is instructed to prepare a valuation report for the matrimonial home and on a joint basis which means that both the husband and the wife instruct the valuer. The role of this expert is to value property and not to sell it. A fee is often charged by the valuer and estimates can be obtained in advance.

Of course, it is capable for a husband and wife to agree the value of their home or if the difference between them is very small, to split the difference. For some married couples, however, a professional valuation is required also for peace of mind. Ultimately where agreement can still not be reached or the husband and the wife will not agree to a joint instruction by a valuer the Court can appoint an expert to resolve this valuation issue once and for all.

The valuation is obviously important because then there is a firm base from which the negotiations can start and to take into account any other relevant financial issues on divorce or separation.

Like anything in life, there is always the temptation to have a go at it yourself whether that is putting shelves on a wall or repairing a car. Why should a DIY divorce be any different?

To a certain extent some problems can be relatively straightforward to fix and divorce itself can be a relatively straightforward procedure.

Some online divorce websites will advertise certain packages at relatively low fees but, subject to certain exemptions, the Court fees need to be paid and, in any event, the relevant Court forms are available from the HM Courts and Tribunals Service website for free.

But if your fuse box is broken then it is unlikely that you would want to tamper with it. Equally, when parties separate or divorce, the actual divorce procedure could be straightforward but, in reality, it can be the financial issues which require the expert and specialist pension from a divorce solicitor and that is not to mention any relevant issues concerning the children.

We have also encountered many cases where husband and wife believe they have resolved matters between them only for it then to transpire that there is not a proper financial agreement and, in turn, this allows everything to unravel and such cases can actually be quite problematic and more expensive than it would have been had the parties sought legal advice from the start.

In the end, whatever the job, a person will attempt a DIY approach to save monies. There is a perception that a divorce solicitor might be expensive but there are a variety of ways within which costs can be saved by working as a team with your solicitor; and it is always important to keep any legal costs in proportion to what is at stake.

There is a common adage amongst divorce lawyers that a “man who acts for himself has a fool for a client”. This really means that their lack of objectivity prevents them from dealing with the legal issues properly and reasonably; which in the end may only serve to cause further dispute, delay and in the worst case a poor financial settlement on divorce.
Like anything in life, there needs to be a balance between cutting too many corners, paying for professional advice for the job to be done properly, fairly and proportionately; and not only to save costs but also to save time and give peace of mind.

Like anything in life, there is always the temptation to have a go at it yourself whether that is putting shelves on a wall or repairing a car. Why should a DIY divorce be any different?

To a certain extent some problems can be relatively straightforward to fix and divorce itself can be a relatively straightforward procedure.

Some online divorce websites will advertise certain packages at relatively low fees but, subject to certain exemptions, the Court fees need to be paid and, in any event, the relevant Court forms are available from the HM Courts and Tribunals Service website for free.

But if your fuse box is broken then it is unlikely that you would want to tamper with it. Equally, when parties separate or divorce, the actual divorce procedure could be straightforward but, in reality, it can be the financial issues which require the expert and specialist pension from a divorce solicitor and that is not to mention any relevant issues concerning the children.

We have also encountered many cases where husband and wife believe they have resolved matters between them only for it then to transpire that there is not a proper financial agreement and, in turn, this allows everything to unravel and such cases can actually be quite problematic and more expensive than it would have been had the parties sought legal advice from the start.

In the end, whatever the job, a person will attempt a DIY approach to save monies. There is a perception that a divorce solicitor might be expensive but there are a variety of ways within which costs can be saved by working as a team with your solicitor; and it is always important to keep any legal costs in proportion to what is at stake.

There is a common adage amongst divorce lawyers that a “man who acts for himself has a fool for a client”. This really means that their lack of objectivity prevents them from dealing with the legal issues properly and reasonably; which in the end may only serve to cause further dispute, delay and in the worst case a poor financial settlement on divorce.

Like anything in life, there needs to be a balance between cutting too many corners, paying for professional advice for the job to be done properly, fairly and proportionately; and not only to save costs but also to save time and give peace of mind.

If you are currently entitled to legal aid and considering divorce, now would be a good time to act. A new legal aid bill, which comes into force in April next year, axes legal aid for family law disputes save those involving domestic abuse.

Over the weekend, The Guardian has reported on how this will impact on less well-off families. Spouses may struggle to resolve financial or children disputes without the benefit of advice from a family law specialist. The President of the Family Division, Sir Nicholas Wall, recently raised concerns that family disputes will be increasingly difficult for judges to resolve, when there is no legal representation for parties at court.

Whilst we do not offer a legally aided service, we frequently speak to spouses or cohabitants who are worried that whilst their partner can afford to pay for legal advice, they cannot. Understandably, there is concern that they would be 'out-gunned' if unable to agree matters amicably. This can often seem very unfair, particularly if, because of family choices in happier times such as one party being a home maker, there is unequal access to family income or savings, to fund a divorce.

Although greater emphasis will quite rightly be placed on alternative methods of dispute resolution (mediation or collaborative law), these are not always appropriate if, for example, there has been physical or emotional abuse. In any event, these methods must also be funded, and can themselves be costly.

However, there is some light at the end of the tunnel. Whilst currently it is not possible for the court to order an interim lump sum to be paid by one spouse to another (to help fund interim expenses such as legal costs), the new bill includes such provision. This would help hugely in redressing the balance between spouses' interim financial positions.

If you don't want to wait for the bill to come into force next year, there are other options if you are worried about funding your legal costs. It is possible to apply for an interim maintenance order forcing your spouse to pay maintenance prior to settlement of all your financial claims on divorce, which includes an element of funding for legal fees. Alternatively, some banks offer 'litigation loans'; personal loans made for the purpose of funding a divorce repayable when your settlement is received.

If you would like to discuss this issue, or any other family matter, please contact Helen at helen.miller@family-law.co.uk or on 01625 544 657, for a free, informal chat.

It is time to make 'no fault' divorce an option for couples separating in England & Wales, according to Sir Nicholas Wall, President of the Family Division, in his key-note speech to the annual conference of UK family law organisation Resolution.

Sir Nicholas Wall observed that from a judge's point of view, allegations of fault are largely irrelevant when addressing other issues arising on separation, such as financial matters or disputes over children. The concept of 'fault' is rather out-dated now that the divorce itself is very much an administrative process.

Currently, unless a couple is content to wait for two years to pass after separation before issuing divorce proceedings, it is impossible to avoid an element of blame either on the basis of adultery, or unreasonable behaviour.

Most family law solicitors, sensitive to the needs of the individuals involved, will take pains to avoid inflammatory language in a divorce petition. However a 'fault' based petition is still not the ideal starting point for the conciliatory resolution of divorce proceedings.

Judges already regard the basis of the divorce as the subjective opinion of the petitioner, and are very mindful that there are two sides to every story. Hopefully, with the backing of the President of the Family Division, a genuine 'no fault' divorce will be an option available to those wishing to divorce in amicable terms.

If you wish to discuss any of the issues raised above, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the team at James Maguire & Co who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

Child abduction is becoming an increasingly worrying occurrence in today’s world.
According to the Office of the Official Solicitor and Public Trustee there were 402 new referred cases of child abduction in 2005, 432 in 2006, 461 in 2007, 508 in 2008 and 543 in 2009 – alarmingly those figures are growing.

Furthermore, latest figures released by reunite International Child Abduction Centre showed a 47% cent increase in the number of child abduction cases reported to their advice line.

The above figures represent the reported cases....and what about all those cases that are not?

Alison Shalaby, reunite´s Acting Director, said: "It is concerning that we have seen such a large increase in the number of children abducted, especially as we know this is just the tip of the iceberg - many cases go unreported either to ourselves or government departments”.


"There are many reasons why a parent may abduct their child. For some it may be a deliberate act to deny the other parent contact, for others there may be sociological or economic factors, or in some instances a parent may abduct their child out of fear for the child´s safety. Whatever the reason, parental child abduction causes real harm to children who potentially suffer great emotional trauma by suddenly being ripped away from all they know and being denied contact with their left-behind parent and extended family."

There are 3 broad categories of child abduction:

Abduction – where a child is taken out of the jurisdiction without the other parent’s consent – this may be a criminal offence under UK law (except in Scotland)

Wrongful retention – where a child has been retained in a foreign country following an overseas trip

Threat of abduction – where there is a risk of that a child will be taken out of the jurisdiction

How the particular case will be dealt with depends on whether the child has been abducted to a Hague Convention or non Hague Convention country.

The former include countries which signed up to an agreement aiming to ensure the return of an abducted child to the country where he or she normally lives, so that issues of residence (custody) and contact (access) can be decided by the courts of that country.

If the child has been taken to a country that has not signed up to the Hague Convention the matter becomes more complicated as the parent may have to apply for residence and permission to bring the child back to England and Wales through the courts of that particular country.

If your child has been abducted or there is a threat of abduction, you must act quickly.

If you have any concerns about the above issues, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the team at James Maguire & Co who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

It has recently been reported by Telegraph, that Michael Prest, a wealthy Nigerian-born, British-based oil baron, and the founder of Petrodel Resources, has been granted permission to use Nigerian tribal law to appeal a $21 million divorce payout to his former British wife.

Mr Priest has appealed the High Court’s decision on the basis that his Petrodel ‘s assets do not belong to him but instead are held on trust for his children, siblings, nephews and nieces in Nigeria, under Nigerian Itsekiri customary law.

Customary law, which reflects the ancient rules of various ethnic and religious groups, is one of the foundations of Nigerian law, alongside common law and legislation. Under such law, Mr Prest claims, he has a historic responsibility to use the family ‘inheritance’ to look after his siblings and their children.

According to Telegraph Prest’s case is also helped by the fact that his younger brother went to a Nigerian High Court in 2009 and obtained a declaration which states that Petrodel Resources is a part of their late father’s estate. Furthermore, an order has been acquired from a Nigerian court which forbids him from sharing information about Petrodel and its assets with third parties.

Although Lord Justice Thorpe criticised Mr Prest's ‘flagrant breach’ of his duty to fully disclose his financial affairs, he granted him permission to appeal after hearing that the Nigerian court had forbidden him from sharing information relating to Petrodel with third parties.

"We are giving you leave on the customary law point and permission to bring in the Nigerian judgment" he said "The ownership of Petrodel is bound up with Nigeria and may be governed by customary law."

Lord Justice Thorpe also criticised the "astronomical" legal costs of the case, which have reached almost £3 million since the split in 2008.

During the initial court proceedings, Mrs Prest claimed that Petrodel was completely owned and controlled by Mr Prest. She asked for a payout of about $40 million plus $1 million a year for upkeep of herself and their 4 children. Mr Prest had previously offered her the equivalent of $35,000.00 a year and a lump sum of about $2.5 million.

The court has not yet set a date for the full appeal.

If you are in the process of getting divorce, or you are divorced but the financial matters are still outstanding, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the team at James Maguire & Co who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529 456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.co.uk

The recent case of S v AG relates to financial remedy (ancillary relief) proceedings issued by the husband against his former wife following her win on the National Lottery.

In brief, the parties had married in Columbia in 1984. They came to England with their two children in 1991. The marriage was unhappy from at least the mid-1990s.
On 31st December 1999 the wife won £500,000.00 through a lottery syndicate. Majority of that sum was used to purchase and renovate a property which became the family home.

The parties separated in 2003. Husband applied for divorce in the UK but there were subsequent Columbian proceedings divorcing the parties and liquidating assets.

In 2006, husband applied for permission to apply for financial provision in England and Wales. By the time of the court proceedings, wife had transferred over £250,000.00 to a third party in response to husband’s application. By this stage, wife was living in a house worth £495,000.00 (with £305,000.00 mortgage) and had remarried.

The question for the judge (Mostyn J) was, amongst other things, whether or not the lottery wins should be regarded as matrimonial or non-matrimonial property.
Firstly, Mostyn J rejected wife’s assertion that the parties had been separated since 1996 and therefore that the lottery win had been post-separation. There was clear evidence that the parties separated in 2003.

Secondly, he also rejected wife’s claim that it was not her who in fact had won the lottery. The wife alleged that the monies had been won by her friend who then lent her some of the winnings.

Mostyn J then looked at the principle of need and found that husband had a need for a lump sum of £82,000 in order to provide for his old age. Such a sum would leave wife and her new husband with ample funds to provide for their own old age.
In terms of whether or not the lottery win was classed as matrimonial or non matrimonial property was fact and case specific.

He stated that if the spouses were in a syndicate together (formal or informal) and both agreed to a purchase of the lottery ticket, then the prize would be joint and consequently equally shared. However, if one party acted out of their own accord (bought the ticket from their own income) and without the knowledge of the other, then the prize would be that party’s alone, thus considered as non-matrimonial.

In this case, the judge found that the initial lottery prize was non-matrimonial money. Wife was unilaterally playing the lottery, without husband's knowledge, and bought the tickets from her own earned income. However, when wife invested her winnings into what was to become the new family home, she converted that part of her non-matrimonial assets into matrimonial property.

Nonetheless, given that the source of this matrimonial property was a non-matrimonial asset, and given the relatively short period in which husband actually lived in the house, equal sharing of that property would not be justified.

The judge decided that a share of 15 – 20% would be fair and ultimately awarded husband a lump sum of £85,000.00 on a clean break basis.

If you are in the process of getting divorce, or you are divorced but the financial matters are still outstanding, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the team at James Maguire & Co who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529 456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.co.uk

In the recent matrimonial case of Young and Young, High Court Judge dealt with the legal principles relevant to applications about seizing a passport or where one party (in this case the Husband) seeks the release of the passport.

In brief, the Husband had been found in contempt of court in relation to financial disclosure (which means that he either failed to disclose all the required documentation or the information he provided was purposely inaccurate and he remained in contempt of court in relation to £915,000.00 of maintenance payments. The court ordered for his passport to be impounded and the Husband applied for the release of his passport as he wished to travel to Africa to engage in charity work.

Wife opposed the application in the light of his conduct during the financial proceedings and sought that the Husband’s passport should continue to be held until after final hearing. Furthermore, a further questionnaire was due to be served on the Husband and she argued that he needed to be in the country to answer it.
The High Court Judge agreed with the Wife and stated that Husband’s passport should continue to be retained for further 9 months allowing the Husband to apply again for a discharge.

In his judgment, Mostyn J considered the following principles:-

1. The power to impound a passport pending the disposal of a financial remedy claim exists in principle in aid of all the court’s procedures leading to the disposal of the proceedings.

2. But it involves a restriction of a subject’s liberty and so should be exercised with caution. The authorities emphasise the short-term nature of the restrain. The law favours liberty.

3. A good cause of action for a substantive award must be established.

4. The applicant must establish that there is probable cause for believing that the respondent is about to quit the jurisdiction unless he is restrained.

5. And the applicant must further establish that the absence of the respondent from the jurisdiction will materially prejudice her in the prosecution of her action.

6. Provides that the principles mentioned above are carefully observed a passport impounding order will represent a proportionate public policy based restrain on freedom of movement founded on the personal conduct of the respondent.

Seizure of the passport is therefore seen as a restriction of one’s liberty and freedom and courts will apply caution when making such an order.
If you are worried that your partner may leave the country before your financial matters are settled or have any questions generally, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the team at James Maguire & Co who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529 456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.co.uk

Lately, there have been a lot of talks in the news and on the radio about shared parenting.

The Justice secretary Ken Clarke has told BBC Radio 4 in his recent interview: ‘We are stating what I think is the view of most people which is that both parents have responsibilities and rights towards their children and the children are entitled to try and maintain contact with both parents if it’s at all possible’.

He went on to say: ‘We want to put back confidence, the courts will have proper regard to the position of fathers and the right of the child to have contact with the father, but of course in the end the interest of the child must be uppermost and it isn’t always possible’.

Traditionally, on separation one parent would become a ‘primary carer’ of the child (having residence of that child) and the other parent would have contact. The contact arrangements can be agreed between the parties, and quite often they are – if not at the time of the separation between the parties themselves, then through meditation or with assistance of family solicitors. Unfortunately this is not always possible and parents end up at Court.

Shared parenting gives both parents an equal role to play in their children’s live. However, the ‘meaningful relationship’ the Government wants separated parents and their children to have is not about equal division of time the child spends with each of the parents but the quality of the parenting received by the child.

But what does that mean?

There is no guidance as to how much time and how much involvement parents should have in their children’s lives for this shared parenting to exist.
What’s more, the current legislation and family law practitioners already recognise the importance of children having meaningful relationship with both parents as this is in their [children] best interest (in most cases). Is new legislation therefore really necessary?

Perhaps the Government should focus on how to deal with breaches of Contact Orders by parents rather than mending something that’s not broken?
Surely the bigger issue relates to parents who use their children against their ex-partners by preventing contact from taking place (which will still probably be taking place even with shared parenting in force)?

If you have any concerns about the issue or have any questions about family law or the children matters generally, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the team at James Maguire & Co who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

Child benefit, one of the few non-means tested benefits remaining is to be cut for higher income families under new government proposals.

Chancellor George Osbourne has announced that from 2013, the government will withdraw child benefit from families in which one or both parents are higher-rate tax payers ie those who earn more than £42,475 per year.

The net effect of the proposal is that if both parents earn less than £42,475 per year, they will continue to receive the benefit. However, if one parent is a high earner, the family will no longer have an entitlement to receive the benefit. This begs the question of whether the proposals are fair and the topic is presently the subject of significant public debate.

At James Maguire & Co, we have a wealth of experience of cases where one parent earns the main income and the other does not work or is on a smaller or nominal income due to commitments to children, the family and the like. In such cases, we have found that the common position is for the parent who does not have the income or has the lesser income to receive the child benefit payments into their bank account.

From a family law perspective, the concern is what would happen to the entitlement upon separation. The timescales for completion of the divorce process can vary greatly depending upon the complexity of the issues involved and what is at stake financially. Here at family law specialists James Maguire & Co we find that the process can often take 6-12 months plus if it is necessary for the financial aspect to be resolved by way of an application to Court.

Under the proposals, what, therefore will be the position for a non-earner or lower income parent who is separated from their high earner spouse pending resolution of the finances. Will the non-earner or low income parent be precluded from receiving child benefit until the case is resolved and the parties are divorced? Many non-earner or low income parents are reliant on receipt of child benefit during this difficult period.

It is therefore clear that some thought needs to be given to these proposals and in particular, the position regarding entitlement to child benefit upon separation.
If you have any concerns about the issue or have any questions about family law or the divorce procedure generally, please do not hesitate to contact a member of the team at James Maguire & Co who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

I appeared today, 22 November 2011, on the Phil Upton Breakfast Show for BBC-WM. The topic was Child Abduction and this followed a story about a father in Cannock who had spent the last six months trying to secure the return of his child.

Whilst statics are not particularly reliable, over the last year there have been some four hundred children abducted from the jurisdiction of England and Wales to other countries around the world. I made the point on the radio that whilst this is very worrying, equally there are a similar amount of children abducted into this country from elsewhere in the world.

What can be done? Like anything in life prevention is better than cure.

If a parent fears that his/her child may be taken away from this country then it should be reported to the Police first of all. The Police also have power to direct an all sea and airport alert where the removal of the child is real and imminent. At the same time, that parent should take immediate legal advice.

The Family Court have a raft of powers to try and stop the abduction. For example, a Prohibited Steps Order can be made and once served it is there to forbid a parent or person from removing a child from this jurisdiction of England and Wales.

However, there are many cases where the first a parent knows is by the fact the child has already gone. Much will depend then on whether or not the country the child has been taken to is a signatory to the 1980 Hague Convention or not. In 2010/11 there were one hundred and sixty one cases of children being taken to countries not signed up to this global child abduction treaty. This is an increase from one hundred and forty six children in the previous year. Pakistan, Thailand and India were the most common abduction destinations last year and among the ninety seven countries that have not ratified the 1980 Hague Convention. The Hague Convention itself is an attempt to provide a legal framework and a means therefore for parents to apply for the return of their child. Clearly, the lack of international agreement in certain countries makes negotiations very difficult.

There needs to be greater education so that the public are aware of the existence of the Child Abduction Unit within the Ministry of Justice and also the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Organisations such as the charity Reunite (www.reunite.org) can also provide advice and guidance. There also needs to be greater education to help prevent child abduction with agencies such as the Police. At the same time, and whilst attempts are being made, what at a state level can be done to bring other countries on board to the 1980 Hague Convention and from where a country is a signatory to it, to ensure that they actually comply with this legal convention.

The father in Cannock is seeking to bring a petition to allow a debate in Parliament to raise awareness generally. This is a very important issue and sadly parental child abduction is more common than people believe. The psychological impact for the parent left behind must be profound but that is to be considered also in terms of the psychological impact for the child who is separated from his or her parent.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

Until summer 2005, divorce in Spain required two separate legal proceedings: one to separate, and that takes at least a year; and another to actually divorce, which takes another year. In addition, in order to obtain a divorce, one of those involved should be proven to be the guilty party – to somehow have failed the marriage, or to have left the home for a period of at least 6 months.

The new divorce law allows the two members of the couple or each of them independently to file for divorce in court without having to agree this with the other. The only requisite to file for a divorce is that both partners have been married for at least 3 months. If so, they can obtain their divorce in just two months. If one of the partners does not agree to the divorce, then the divorce still must be granted – under the new law – but it will take up to six months.

Even if none of the partners haven’t got Spanish nationality or maybe only one of them hasn’t, Spanish Courts can still rule about their divorce proceeding as long as the couple has got their usual residence in Spain or if Spain has been the last country where they have been residents. If the divorce affect citizens from the European Union, Spanish Courts will hear about the divorce proceeding as long as:

(1) Spain is the usual residence of the Defendant (2) the divorce petition is filed under mutual agreement and one of the partners has his/her residence in Spain or (3) when the Defendant has been resident in Spain within the previous year of filing the divorce.

Blog provided by:
Lourdes Santisteban lourdes.sb@3xdret.com Spanish Solicitor at 3XDRET SPANISH LAWYERS.

The judgement in the landmark case of Radmacher and Grantino is but a year old. Whilst the case did not establish an outright presumption that all pre and post nuptial agreements are binding, it did establish that in certain circumstances such agreements will be upheld in the Courts of England and Wales.

So what factors determine whether or not an agreement will be upheld?

A three stage test is to be applied when considering the weight which should be given to a pre or post-nuptial agreement, namely:

Upon entering into the agreement, were there any circumstances which should reduce the binding nature of the agreement ie lack of financial disclosure, lack of legal advice?

Were there circumstances which enhance the binding nature of the agreement?

Thirdly, is the agreement ‘fair’? In considering this, the Court will consider the parties’ needs (and those of any children) and ‘compensation’ in deciding whether or not the agreement will be binding.

Since the Judgment, divorce specialists James Maguire & Co have experienced a rise in the number of people seeking advice regarding entering into a pre or post nuptial agreement. This is on the basis that as far as possible they wish to impart some certainty as to the division of assets in case of divorce or as a way of safeguarding a particular asset ie pre-acquired wealth or inheritance. This is particularly relevant in today’s uncertain economic climate.

If you are considering entering into a pre or post-nuptial agreement and would like advice on the merits of doing so, please contact a member of the James Maguire & Co. family law team who would be happy to assist you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

For years now the Courts have tried to determine and solidify the notion of matrimonial and non-matrimonial property in financial matters following a divorce. This is the notion that some assets should be considered as being part of the marriage and others should be considered as being outside of the marriage and therefore not capable of being brought into the matrimonial pot and be divided between the parties upon their divorce.

The Courts have now given consideration to money gained by a lottery win in the case of S v AG and whether it should be considered matrimonial property when one party wins.

In S v AG, the Wife had been part of a lottery syndicate and won £500,000 in 1999. The Wife used the majority of this money to purchase and renovate a property which became the family home. The parties separated in 2003 and the Husband made a claim against the wife for financial relief in relation to this property.

The Court found that the initial lottery win by the Wife was non-matrimonial money. The Wife was unilaterally playing the lottery without her Husband’s knowledge and bought the ticket from her own money.

The Court found that although when the Wife purchased the family home with her lottery money, this money was converted into matrimonial property, given the source of the property (i.e. the lottery money which was used to purchase the property) was non-matrimonial money and the Husband had only lived in the property for a relatively short time, the Court held that it would be unjustifiable to award the Husband an equal share of the property and subsequently awarded him 17.7% of the value of the property.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

At a press conference in London yesterday (18.10.2011) seminal Manchester band of the late 1980’s and 1990’s, The Stone Roses, have confirmed they are reuniting to play 2 comeback concerts at Heaton Park, Manchester on June 29th and 30th 2012 followed by a world tour and a new album.

“What on earth has this to do with family law?” I hear you shout. Well, believe it or not, we are not that far removed from popular culture here at James Maguire & Co. Not only are we excited at the prospect of seeing our favourite “baggy” band back on stage but rumours circulating regarding the motivation behind the reunion have prompted some discussion amongst colleagues here.

A number of websites have suggested that allegedly singer Ian Brown’s recent divorce from his ex-model wife and mother of his child is his main reason for agreeing the reunion which has been talked about but never happened for years. James Maguire & Co Ltd cannot comment on the validity of this rumour but with some estimates putting potential earnings at around £15million per band member, this is what is known as a potential VARIATION EVENT.

Essentially, in certain circumstances- and a vast increase in earnings can be such a circumstance- it may well be possible for the ex Mrs Brown to return to Court to request further financial relief in addition to any settlement she has been previously awarded.

Of course, as with all things, it is never as simple as just that. Our advice to Mr or Mrs Brown or indeed anyone facing these circumstances would be to seek the expert guidance of a family law solicitor as to the realistic chances of success. There is always the option to vary downwards as well as upwards if everything goes wrong for The Roses and they end up embroiled in more years of legal battles.
With that in mind, we are busy working out who is going to camp out all night to buy our tickets. See you in the front row!

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

Is it third time lucky for Sir Paul McCartney?!

On 9th October 2011 Sir Paul McCartney married American heiress Nancy Shevell at a ceremony in London.

This will be Sir Paul McCartney’s third marriage following the death of his first wife, Linda McCartney in 1998 and the very acrimonious breakup of his marriage to Heather Mills in 2008.

It has been speculated in the press that Sir Paul McCartney refused Nancy Shevell’s offer to sign a pre-nuptial agreement stating that she would have no claim to the multi-millionaires fortune if they divorce.

What is a pre-nuptial agreement?

A pre-nuptial agreement is an agreement between partners outlining how wealth should be distributed upon divorce. It enables people to protect their pre-acquired wealth but also inherited wealth that they expect to receive during the marriage. These agreements are not just applicable to marriages, pre-civil marriage agreements and cohabitation agreements can also be drawn up.

Are pre-nuptial agreements binding in the UK?

In the UK, prior to the highly publicised case involving Katrin Radmacher, heiress to a paper industry fortune and her ex-husband Nicloas Granatino, pre-nuptial agreements were not binding and were given very little, if any, weight in UK courts. However, following this case in 2009, pre-nuptial agreements can now be valid and binding on the parties who enter into them.

In Radmacher and Granatino, the High Court awarded Mr Granatino £5.9 million in 2008. Miss Radmacher appealed citing an agreement signed in Germany in 1998 before the couple married which stated that Mr Granatino would not get anything if the pair divorced.

The Court of Appeal, in a landmark decision, ruled in July 2009 that the pre-nuptial agreement was valid and reduced Mr Granatino’s settlement to £1 million. Mr Granatino appealed to the Supreme Court. Mr Granatino’s lawyers argued that he should not be held to the terms of the pre-nuptial agreement because he did not obtain independent legal advice before signing it and Miss Radmacher did not disclose details of her financial situation in the contract.

The Supreme Court ruled that the pre-nuptial agreement was binding. The Supreme Court said it agreed that in the right case such agreements can have “decisive or compelling weight”.

This landmark case now means that pre-nuptial agreements can be an effective way of protecting pre-acquired wealth or inherited wealth. However, it is important to seek specialist legal advice so that you are fully informed of the implications of a pre-nuptial agreement both if you wish to make an agreement or are being asked to sign an agreement.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We can offer legal advice to those wishing to enter into a pre-nuptial agreement or those whose partner wishes to enter into a pre-nuptial agreement. We also offer legal advice in relation to children matters and to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

Parental child abduction is a niche area of Family Law but unfortunately it is becoming an increasingly required service. The introduction of The Hague Convention has assisted those parents whose children have been abducted by a parent and the lawyers who work tirelessly in order to try to bring them home but there is also an alarming number of countries which have not ratified the 1980 Hague Convention. In 2010 parental child abduction increased by 39% compared to the previous year to countries that have not ratified the 1980 Hague convention.

Parental child abduction cases often occur when parents of mixed nationalities separate and one parent becomes the primary carer or is awarded residence by the Court. However, this is not always the case. Child abductions also take place where the parents are of the same nationality. This may occur when parents are going through bitter separations or disputes.

Often cases are not reported because they take place in private family courts where there are restrictions upon reporting. However, cases of this nature occur too often.

What is the Hague Convention?

The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is a multilateral treaty, which seeks to protect children from the harmful effects of abduction and retention across international boundaries by providing a procedure to bring about their prompt return.

If a child is abducted from the UK, one of the essential elements of a Hague Convention application is proving that the child is habitually resident in the UK, i.e. that the place where the child lives and where the child’s home is considered to be is the UK. If this is proved and none of the defences are applicable, the Hague Convention requires the nation where the child has been abducted to, to promptly return the child that has been wrongfully retained in their jurisdiction.

There are currently 72 members of The Hague Convention spreading from Albania to Chile to Japan and Australia. For a full list of the member states of The Hague Convention please visit www.hcch.net
Countries currently not in The Hague Convention include Pakistan, Thailand and Nigeria. Unfortunately, cases which involve countries which have not ratified the Hague Convention pose additional difficulties.

If you fear that your child may be removed from their home jurisdiction or you believe that your child has been abducted, it is important to seek legal advice as a matter of urgency. It is important that you seek specialist advice from a specialist child abduction lawyer. In these circumstances it is important to have a lawyer who is calm and methodical who can guide you through the extremely difficult process.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer specialist legal advice in relation to Child Abduction matters, children matters and to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

Parental Responsibility seems to be an increasingly talked about topic – it has even just been discussed on Coronation Street!

Last night (26 September 2011) Tyrone found some information that Kevin had obtained about parental responsibility. As in the land of soap opera an argument then ensured but in the real world what does it all mean?

With the decrease in marriages and the increase in divorces it is important to know your legal position and whether a Children Law application may assist you.
What is Parental Responsibility?

Parental Responsibility is a well-used phrase in Children and Family Law. The concept was introduced by the Children Act 1989. It was a shift away from the idea that parents have “rights” over their child towards the notion that parents have “responsibilities” towards their child. “Rights” has been included in the definition of Parental Responsibility but the concept of Parental Responsibility is more than just these rights.

The Children Act 1989 defines Parental Responsibility as “all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his property.”

Who has Parental Responsibility?

1. Married parents have joint Parental Responsibility.

2. Parents who were married but have separated or divorced retain joint Parental Responsibility.

3. If you have not been married to the child’s mother, only the mother automatically has Parental Responsibility; Fathers can acquire it in a number of ways:

a. If the child was born after 1st December 2003 and you are registered as the father on the child’s birth certificate;

b. Entering into a Parental Responsibility Agreement with the mother. The procedure for this is relatively straight forward. The prescribed form is available at (insert site) both parents need to attend their local County Court together and swear this agreement on oath or affirm if you are not religious.

c. Apply to the Court for a Parental Responsibility Order.

d. By being appointed a guardian either by the mother or by the court, although in these cases the father will assume Parental Responsibility only on the mother’s death.

e. By obtaining a Residence Order from the Court.

f. By marrying the mother.

4. Step-parents and civil partners are also able to obtain Parental Responsibility agreements (with the agreement of both parents) or apply for a Parental Responsibility Order.

If the child lives with a Grandparent, the mother and father of the child retain Parental Responsibly apart from the responsibility of having the child live with them.
What does Parental Responsibility mean to you?

Parental Responsibility gives the parent or parents who have Parental Responsibility, responsibility for making all the important decisions in a child’s life including medical care, religion and education.

If both parents have Parental Responsibility, then these important decisions should be made jointly. If the parents cannot agree or a parent becomes aware that the other parent is in the process of making an important decision for the child and has not consulted the other parent, an application to Court may be made for a Specific Issue Order, where the Court is asked to give Judgment on a specific issue e.g. where the child goes to school, or a Prohibited Steps Order, which prevents one parent from doing an act e.g. removing the child from a particular school.

Where the parents are separated and the child resides with one parent on a day to day basis, the everyday decisions such as what the child eats and what time the child goes to bed are made by the resident parent without the express agreement of the other parent. In reality it may be in the best interests of the child if separated parents can agree on most things, such as what time the child goes to bed so as to encourage the child’s routine, but it may not be practical.

Can you lose Parental Responsibility?

Although many separated parents feel that the other parent should not have Parental Responsibility if for example they do not pay child maintenance, this is not the case. Parental Responsibility is automatically lost upon:

1. The parent’s death

2. The child’s adoption

An unmarried father who acquired Parental Responsibility by agreement, an Order of the Court or if the child was born after 1st December 2003 and is on the child’s birth certificate, can lose it if the Court makes a further Order ending it.
If an unmarried father acquired Parental Responsibility by being granted a Residence Order, he does not lose PR upon the termination of the Residence Order. However, if a Grandparent has acquired a Residence Order, he or she will lose Parental Responsibility when the Order is terminated.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children. We also offer legal advice in relation to matters covered in this blog and general Children Law advice.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

The CSA has revealed its ten most bizarre excuses for not paying child maintenance. They are:

1. I'm not paying another penny. I've already bought my child a pick-and-mix this week', complained one.

2. Another said he could not pay for his children because he had to take his ostrich to the vet.

3. A footballer earning £4000 a week said the cost of keeping his Ferrari on the road meant he wasn't able to pay off his arrears.

4. One man said "I paid for her breast enhancement - and her new boyfriend is getting the benefit. I'm not paying child maintenance on top."

5. A man rang the Agency to say he couldn't be the child's father because the woman who filed the claim was too ugly.

6. Several have said it was against their human rights to have money deducted from their salaries.

7. 'I'm not liable to pay child support because I'm no longer the person named on the child's birth certificate" was the excuse of one man - after he had changed his name by deed poll.

8. Hundreds respond to arrears notices saying "the dog ate my wage slips and letters from the CSA".

9. A father who had undergone a sex change becoming a woman argued she should not have to pay because she is not the man who fathered the children.

10. And finally, another claimed he didn't officially exist any more because he was on the 'witness protection programme'. He wasn't and was made to pay.
I’m sure you will agree that these are the most ludicrous excuses! In reality though, there are many parents who refuse to pay child maintenance. Child maintenance can be arranged by private arrangements between parents, through the CSA, during financial proceedings upon divorce and through applications under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce Law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this and children matters including child maintenance. We can also advise on Schedule1 Children Act 1989 applications.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law.

The process of separation, divorce and reaching an agreement regarding division of assets can be arduous and stressful. Divorce law can be complex and difficult to understand. Add into the equation a stagnant property market, income pay freezes and a reluctance on the part of financial institutions to lend.

With properties taking anything from months to years to sell and borrowing at a minimum, implementation of financial splits is becoming increasingly difficult in reality. In the circumstances, couples are finding themselves being forced to remain under the same roof until such time as a sale of the family home can be achieved or one party can raise funds to buy the other out.

Enter the rise of the ‘mid-nuptial’ agreements. These agreements aim to regulate such things as living space and interim finances. For example, should one party be paying to the other a level of support during the attempt to lead separate lives but under the same roof? Who is to have use of the family car? Where should confidential documents be kept? Do improvements need to be made to the house to make it more saleable?

Consideration should of course, also be given to the impact which remaining under the same roof may have on the children. It may be that the parties need to come to some form of agreement to the effect that each parent spends some time away from the property so that each parent has some equality time with the children and to help them come to terms with the separation and the reality of the future arrangements.

All of the above are important considerations to bear in mind whilst the economic climate continues to recover.

If you would wish to discuss the possibility of entering into such agreement or are experiencing any of the issues raised above, please do not hesitate to contact one of the team at family law specialists James Maguire & Co. who would be happy to discuss matters with you.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law

Well apparently autumn is upon us! The Great British Summertime is over and we can pack up our Pimms glasses and Croquet set for another year! The new school year has arrived and whilst little Johnny is worried his blazer is too big (“you’ll grow into it darling”) and Amelia is deeply concerned she won’t be sitting next to her “BFF” this year, spare a thought for the parents whose daily chore it is to deposit their offspring at the school gates and speed on two wheels into work for 9am ready for another day at the coalface?!

Joking aside, the reality is that September is a high stress time for families. Children are adjusting to a new school term or maybe even a new school and parents are trying to keep them on track whilst coping with the financial pressures of new uniforms and school trips and still paying off the summer holiday. Plus the endless commute and the fact that work-wise the summertime slumber has passed and all of a sudden everybody wants everything NOW...

James Maguire & Co Solicitors are experts in family law and, as such, we are well aware that this is a strained time for the family unit. Often issues that have been bubbling away quietly on the back burner will come to the fore in the pressure cooker atmosphere of the next few weeks - many people will be reaching for the services of a divorce lawyer. In light of the time pressure on our clients during the autumn months we are pleased to offer evening consultations by appointment to our news client. Please contact us at the office if you require our assistance.

James Maguire & Co is a specialist firm of Family Law and Divorce law solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We offer legal advice to parties going through a divorce including the financial issues which flow from this (including pensions), linked business issues, international aspects and any relevant issues concerning the children.

We advise clients in the Wilmslow area and also to the surrounding areas of Alderley Edge, Bramhall, Hale, Altrincham, Manchester and the North West. We are also able to act for clients nationally and internationally subject to the jurisdiction of England and Wales. For advice please contact James Maguire by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email james.maguire@family-law

The Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky and his ex-wife, Galina Besharova, have parted company in what is understood to be Britain’s largest ever reported divorce settlement. It is understood that Ms Besgarova received more than £100m from her ex-husband. The previous settlement record was the £48m paid by an insurance broker, John Charman, to his former wife, Beverley.

Mr Berezovsky and Ms Besharova met in 1981 when he was a professor of mathematics in Moscow earning £60 a month. He later set himself up in business and became one of the original Russian oligarchs. The couple, who both live in the UK, cited ‘unreasonable behaviour’ as the reason for their break up.

The precise figure of the settlement remains unknown in order to protect the couple’s privacy. There had been no pre-nuptial agreement. Although this is being reported in the press as the biggest ever settlement in the country, we must bear in mind that the large majority of cases settle outside of the Court process and are negotiated privately. This can result in many, even bigger settlements going unnoticed and unreported in the press.

For family law or divorce law advice please contact James Maguire, Divorce Solicitor, by telephone +44 (0) 1625 529456 or by email at james.maguire@family-law.co.uk - to see our pages about finances, please click here:www.family-law.co.uk and for our finance flow chart for England and Wales please click here: www.family-law.co.uk

James Maguire & Co are a specialist firm of Family Law Solicitors based in Wilmslow, Cheshire. We act for clients in the Manchester and North West areas, nationally and internationally.

As reported in The Telegraph on 12 August 2011, a couple who have been married for 25 years and with a total wealth of some £21m +, the High Court considered how the inherited wealth, most of which had been received from the husband's father, should be dealt with.

The wife sought a £7m share but the husband argued "that applying the 'sharing principle' to give the wife a stake in her husband's inherited wealth would be an 'invasion' of a fortune he owed to his father".

Mr Justice Moylan agreed with the husband. The High Court ruled that the wealth of the couple was "not the product of their endeavours" and so the sharing principle should be ignored.

Further still, the Judge said that the husband's wealth was 'non matrimonial' and that it was fair to base the wife's award on a 'generous assessment' of her needs.

The outcome of this case was that she was awarded a £3.3m settlement on top of her own £1m assets. This would allow the wife to buy a £1.1m house and give her an income of £115,000 a year plus additional 'discretionary' spending.

The actual case law report is awaited. The decision, however, seems to treat inherited wealth in a similar way that certain US states do by classing it as "separate property" rather than "community" property i.e. a product of the marriage.

Yesterday’s Daily Mail website reported the (questionably newsworthy?!) story that celebrity divorced dad Peter Andre was “perfectly amicable” with not only his ex wife and mother of his 2 children, but Ms Price’s new toy- boyfriend Leandro Penna, when they bumped into each other at a school sports day.

Judgements on whether such a seismic encounter warrant media attention aside, it does highlight the sensitivities and difficulty surrounding separated parents and new partners meeting at children’s events. James Maguire & Co is often consulted by parents facing this situation and needing guidance. Our advice is never to let the combative nature of the school sports day influence you- leave the posturing and peacocking to the competitors, it is neither beneficial to yourself and, importantly, the children to use these events as an opportunity to air grievances. Remember that children are hugely sensitive to the moods of their parents and all they really want out of sports day is to win their race!!

The Law Commission has announced it is to conduct a review of how Court Orders for financial provision on divorce and child maintenance arrangements are enforced. The aim of the review is to make the option of enforcement more readily accessible and clear for individuals who find themselves in the difficult situation whereby the other party is not complying with the terms of a Court Order.

At present, there are avenues which an individual can proceed down to enforce the terms of an Order against a defaulting party, however, these are often complicated, costly and can result in multiple hearings.

The aim of the review is to ensure that money which is to be paid in accordance with a Court Order is paid. Simplification of the enforcement process would also enable divorcing couples to move on with their lives and would limit the damaging effects of ongoing litigation.

After finalising a financial/child maintenance agreement, the last thing people want is to be faced with further litigation to receive payment of what is rightfully theirs.

The review, which is to take place within the next 12 months, is a welcome step.

To mark Father’s Day, the Prime Minister David Cameron launched a stinging attack on absent fathers who fail to support their children.

Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, the PM said that fathers who failed to "financially and emotionally" support their children must face consequences. He went on to state that it was high time that runaway dads are “stigmatised” and suggested that the full force of shame should be “heaped upon them”.

In a highly charged attack, the PM then proceeded to compare absent fathers with “drink drivers, people who are beyond the pale.”

The PM’s comments have been met with criticism from opposition parties and charities who campaign on behalf of single parents on the basis that earlier this year, the government said that it wanted to encourage separating couples to organise their own payments and was proposing to introduce a charge for accessing the services of the CSA.

For the moment, the CSA, whatever the rights or wrongs is still in place and provides a useful framework through which single parents can go about receiving financial support for the benefit of their child. Absent fathers – beware!

www.csa.gov.uk

On Tuesday 7th June “I Health” ran an interview with Christina McGhee, a highly successful American “divorce coach” and author who published “Parenting Apart: How Separated and Divorced Parents Can Raise Happy And Secure Kids” (Vermillion).

We all know that a relationship breakdown is, to say the least, stressful and we also all know that children are hugely vulnerable to picking up on arguments, tension and all of the emotions that parents feel when going through this process. It is a difficult time for all involved and perhaps for children who are trying to adapt to a situation they have very little say in and control over.

With this in mind I have provided a link to the article which focuses on Ms McGhee’s top ten tips on raising children apart responsibly. I think the article is helpful and informative and I am happy to recommend it to clients.

www.independent.co.uk

A bridal train of 2m and 70 cm, a fairy tale balcony kiss, an Aston Martin and an interesting choice of fascinator by Princess Beatrice.. but the question on everyone’s lips is whether or not the blushing bride signed a Royal Wedding ‘Pre-Nup’.

Rumours were circulating that the newly Dutchess of Cambridge signed a pre-nuptial agreement on the eve of her wedding. Such continued speculation was however, quashed last week by senior royal sources who stated that no legally binding document was in fact drawn up before the wedding to safeguard the Duke of Cambridge’s wealth or ensure that the Dutchess is maintained in regal style if they separate.

The recent decision of Radmacher v Granatino in the Supreme Court stated that pre-nups should now be given more weight and will be upheld unless there are compelling reasons to the contrary.

So whether they did or they didn’t, would a ‘pre-nup’ have been practical given the unenviable success rate of recent royal marriages and the disparity in wealth?

What we have here is a young couple, one of whom has significantly more wealth than the other. It may be therefore that the Duke wanted to protect this. Under a pre-nup, the Dutchess’ financial needs including her accustomed standard of living would be established in advance but would not necessarily include half of the Duke’s significant wealth.

So what would be the impact of a pre-nup on their future off-spring? It is likely that any such agreement would take future children into account, however, what is clear is that if an agreement were in place and the terms were contrary to the interests of the children or the division of wealth failed to take their existence into account, the Court would not allow the terms of the agreement to prejudice their interests.

In any event, if they did or they didn’t, we wish them all the very best and hope that if there was an agreement it remains unused and out of sight…

A new set of family procedure rules will apply in England and Wales from the 6 April 2011. In particular, this will affect divorce and financial cases and extra care must always be taken where a family case has an international dimension to it.

One of the significant changes to the rule is that there is a requirement for any Applicant to first see a mediator to determine whether or not mediation is in fact suitable for the case. The difficulty is that where a case, in particular, involves European Union countries (except Denmark) then this could allow the other party i.e. the Respondent to receive advance notice of what is happening. He or she may then tactically try and claim jurisdiction in the EU country which best suits his/her case. Contacting the other party could therefore be fatal. The reason for this is that the financial outcome in the different countries could be significantly different.

All is not lost however as there are some exemptions available which could still allow a party to issue proceedings in England and Wales and therefore to claim jurisdiction in the usual way. There are mixed thoughts about this (often called the lis pendens rule) because it creates tactics and it can actually inflame a situation presently there is no real way round it because as I say to delay could be fatal where a case has an international element to it. In many none EU countries, some regard is given still as to who was first to start the proceedings and therefore it is arguable that the exemption from seeing a mediator should apply in all cases of possible foreign proceedings.

There is justifiable criticism of European Union policymakers who have created this “first to issue” rule in divorce proceedings or it can create what is often called “anti-settlement” and “anti-family life” problems. Whatever the rights and wrongs, extra care should always be taken where the case has some international dimension to it.

In recent years the reputation of the Family Justice System has been damaged by a continuous attack from the various sources.
On the one hand complaints of secrecy were alleged but on the other a need for confidentiality in family cases.

The President of the Family Division, Sir Nicholas Wall has staged a fight-back in the recent case of CW & Ors v TW.
The case involved two children aged 10 and 12. Their parents had separated and there was no communication between them and no trust. The President wished to explain both to the parties and also to the public at large why he regarded the case as important.

At paragraph 8 of the Judgment he said:
“Although it can be argued that care taken over this case by the Circuit Bench is disproportionate, it none the less represents the type of difficult family case with which the Circuit and District Benches are wrestling day in and day out.
It does not contain any point of law, and it is not reportable. It is of acute importance to the parties, but of little public interest. The parties are not "personalities" or otherwise in the public domain, yet the case is an intractable contact dispute of a type which represents a major aspect of the work undertaken by the Circuit and District Bench.

Those who criticise the family justice system for the superficiality and "knee-jerk" nature of it's Judgment would do well to read what follows”.
This most senior Judge was at pains to explain considerable care and thoroughness with which the Court had dealt with the case over a number of years and the fact that "Judges do not deprive separated parents of contact with their children lightly or for no good reason".

However, the debate is set to continue about the nature and the extent to which family proceedings should be open to reporting and media access.

In a recent interview with The Times, Sir Nicholas Wall, the President of the Family Division, has recommended that unmarried couples should have more rights if they separate. The myth still circulates that co-habiting couples still have rights because they are "common law" husband or wife. In fact, the reality is that unmarried couples have little protection or rights compared to married couples.

This has often been a political "hot potato" because of concerns undermining the status of marriage. The reply often is that those co-habiting couples often have the option to marry. Of course, this can be difficult in reality because it will always take two to enter into a marriage and matters become more complicated where children have been born during the relationship.

Presently, any financial claims relating to child maintenance, which is dealt with by the Child Support Agency (now the Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission) unless the parents can agree otherwise. There are no real rights for maintenance to the other party or indeed in respect of other capital, business, pensions and so on. The Court does, however, have the power to order the other parent to provide a property, commonly on trust, for the children to live in but this must revert back to that parent when the children finish school or university. The unmarried person or partner who cares and looks after the children cannot make any claims in respect of property, maintenance, pension for themselves.

There are not only concerns about the implication of this if couples separate but also if one of them were to die because there are none of the inheritance tax advantages of marriage.

By contrast, the position is completely different for married couples. Here, a Court has a very wide discretion to make an Order which is fair and reasonable often to provide for the needs of the parties and any children, for example, in relation to housing, maintenance and so on. The Court also has a wide variety of orders to include a payment of a lump sum, transferring rights in properties, ordering a property to be sold, maintenance for a spouse and for the children, pension sharing and so on.

More and more couples are co-habiting but the complications of this are not always known. The myth of "common law" husband or wife seems set to continue and there appears to be no foreseeable prospect of a change of law. This seems to be much to the frustration of senior Judges who see a number of cases where there is a substantial injustice.

As everyone knows, marriage is in decline. Many couples prefer to co-habit. However, will the forthcoming marriage of Prince William and Kate Middleton in April start to change all of that?

Iain Duncan-Smith, the Work & Pension Secretary, this week has launched Marriage Week UK to provide cash incentives for married couples.

It is all very well setting an example but we can see what happened to Prince Charles. Marriage is a serious commitment. At 28 and 29 respectively, William and Kate are slightly younger than the average marrying couple; the latest figures show the typical first time bride is 29.9 years old and her groom 32.1.

Of course, just because people co-habit does not mean that they are not necessarily against marriage. A lot of those who do co-habit then go on to marry in the future. Interestingly, a Census found that 82% of those married in 1991 were still with their spouse in 2001 compared with 61% for co-habiting couples.

As I have outlined in previous blogs there are also significant differences and financial issues which come into play when married and co-habiting couples separate; and the differences can be quite stark.

Do you think the Royal Wedding will boost the popularity of marriage?

According to Facebook there are more than 50 million users, 70% of which are outside the USA, spending over 700 billion minutes per month on the site, with 50% of active users logging onto their profile in any given day.

Facebook offers the opportunity for people to find another and on occasions this involves former lovers. There is now the concept of a "Facebook Divorce" whereby a person becomes reconnected to a distance flame which can result in the present spouse being left behind and ultimately divorced.

The Telegraph have recently reported Facebook is being cited in almost 1 of 5 divorce petitions. One obvious reason is that Facebook and similar sites are tempting for people to cheat on their partners and, of course, suspicious spouses have used the websites to find evidence of "behaviour" which have led to divorce.
Friends Reunited website paved the way for this several years ago and were blamed at the time for a surge in divorces.

The UK's divorce rate, however, has fallen in recent years but inevitably there will be a surge in divorces as bored husbands and wives use the internet to contact old flames and first loves. Beware!

Home DNA testing kits are going on sale in Boots across the country. A spokesman for Boots has said that "this test provides peace of mind for those of our customers who may be seeking reassurance with paternity matters".

The test is conducted by patients who have taken a mouth swab from each participant and then post the sample to the designated laboratory for analysis. The BBC provided an interview on this subject with Dr Denise Syndercombe-Court of Barts & London Medical School.

A new onus has been placed upon local authorities to provide housing to a wider spectrum of people after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that ‘domestic violence’ in homelessness cases includes psychological as well as physical abuse.

The issue at hand in the test case of Yemshaw v London Borough of Hounslow [2011] UKSC 3 was whether the term ‘violence’ in accordance with section 177(1) of the Housing Act 1996 was limited to physical contact only. In the case, the woman left the matrimonial home which she shared with her husband with her two young children and sought the assistance of the local housing authority. She had complained about her husband’s behaviour, which included him shouting in front of the children. She stated that she scared that he might hit her. Following this, the housing offers took the view that she was not actually homeless because there was no element of physical abuse.

A review panel for the housing authority decided that the root cause of her homelessness was not that she had left the family home after a domestic incident and concluded that the probability of domestic violence was low and therefore it was reasonable for her to remain in the marital home.

The effect of section 177(1) of the 1996 Act, known as a ‘pass-porting’ provision is that a person who is at risk of the domestic violence is automatically deemed ‘homeless’, no matter how reasonable it might be for that person to remain in the accommodation. Issues such as local housing conditions or shortages are not relevant.

In referring the case back to the local housing authority to be re-heard, Lady Hale, who gave the leading judgement, said that domestic violence includes physical violence, threatening or intimidating behaviour and any other form of abuse which, directly or indirectly, may give rise to the risk of harm. The judge said that she did not accept that “physical violence” was the only natural interpretation of the word “violence”.

Previously, in the case of Danesh v Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council [2006] EWCA Civ 1404, the Court of Appeal held that “violence” must involve some degree of “physical” violence. The recent ruling therefore clarifies the position and crucially aligns housing and homelessness law with family law, which already recognises psychological domestic violence.

The decision affords victims greater freedom and protection and ensures that where they are at risk of harm, they have a real choice between remaining in the family home and starting a new life elsewhere.

I have recently posted a blog to set out some helpful tips for couples divorcing. This subsequent blog is a light hearted attempt to show the complete opposite if you want a divorce from hell! Here is what NOT to do:

1. Don't give your lawyer all the facts or information

It's important that you and your solicitor trust each other. So why not give them some but not all of the information and facts? That's really a great strategy.

2. Involve your children

Divorce is unpleasant enough on its own. Why not involve the children and apply unnecessarily for ‘custody’ or use them as pawns in the case?

3. Form a new relationship

If you'd like to make your spouse even less willing to try to reach an agreement, then start dating and make sure you tell them about it.

4. Hide assets

This is a great way to let everyone know that you are the "bad spouse."

5. Start spending

Spend, spend, spend. Everyone will have more to argue about and this will increase the costs. Well done.

6. Stop paying maintenance

Why not? This will give the right impression of your approach to the case.

7. Do nothing

If you really want to frustrate everyone, including your own lawyer, don't do anything. Don't call anyone back. Don't respond to emails or letters.

8. Don't listen to your lawyer, get legal advice from your friends and family

I know you have instructed a lawyer and will pay for the advice but why don’t you ignore it and listen to family and friends instead? Better still why not tell your lawyer about them? He’ll be impressed and will be glad he specialised in family law for all these years.

9. Be expensive

Again, don’t listen to the advice. Be disproportionate: think that the more you spend the higher your settlement will be. Convince yourself because this rarely happens.

10. Be cheap

Alternatively don’t take specialist advice. Watch out though for the consequences. I always thought things were cheap for a reason.

However, if you do wish to obtain proper and specialist advice please contact: james.maguire@family-law.co.uk

When a couple separate there can be a lot of different concerns and anxieties. The following tips are a guide to help focus on some obvious but often forgotten points:

1. Communicate

Communication is often the key to unlocking problems and finding a solution. Every case is capable of being resolved but the most difficult ones are where there is no communication at all.

2. Remember the children

All too often children become involved in the adult dispute. Don’t involve them. They will not thank you for it in later years!

3. Aggression is a sign of weakness

Some people prefer an aggressive approach to their case. Aggression is an emotion and is often a sign of weakness. It is much better to be assertive and be firm in relation to your legal rights.

4. Preparation, preparation, preparation

This is always important to achieve a successful outcome. There is always a tendency to focus on the other person’s case but not to get your own house in order. You must be on top of your own case, be well organised and efficient.

5. Be careful of any international element

More and more cases have an international element to them. For example, the parties may live in different countries or be foreign nationals. It is important that specialist legal advice is obtained quickly. The financial outcome in one country may be completely different to the outcome in another.

6. Seek legal advice early on

This is vital because there are many cases were a person delays seeking advice only to progress their case down one route and then regret it or change their mind. This can make the legal issues more complicated and expensive than they need to be. An initial consultation will help you understand your legal rights and options. It will also guard you against making common mistakes.

7. Research your solicitor

People can often make an impulsive choice to instruct a solicitor without thinking through the process properly. There are different ways of looking for one, for example, independent legal directories, specialist panels and also recommendations. You may want to speak to more than one solicitor and have an initial consultation so that you can make an informed decision about how you would like to proceed.

8. Teamwork

You should be able to work as a team with your solicitor. Subject to the issues in the case and its complexity, you may have to work with your solicitor for at least 6 to 12 months. It is important therefore that you can work together. This can also help you save legal costs because your solicitor can help delegate tasks to you, for example, the initial preparation work. You should also respond promptly to any requests made to you by your solicitor.

9. Be proportionate in terms of time and costs

Cases can be time consuming and this can have an impact on the costs. But they do not need to be. There is sometimes a variety of reasons for this but often it is due to emotion particularly at the early stages. Do not use your solicitor as a counsellor!

10. Remember the bigger picture

It is very difficult to see the word for the trees but you must focus on the bigger picture and what the outcome should be. This can involve a case plan, timetable and strategy. Without any clear direction it will be difficult for you to know and understand what is happening. This can cloud the issues and actually get in the way of a settlement.

For further information please contact: james.maguire@family-law.co.uk