Spotlight
Family Law Awards 2020
Shortlist announced - time to place your vote!
Court of Protection Practice 2020
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength to strength, having...
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance Tenth Edition
Jackson's Matrimonial Finance is an authoritative specialist text...
Spotlight
Latest articles
No fault divorce - the end of the blame game
The Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020, which passed into law on 25 June 2020, will introduce "no fault" divorce in England and Wales for the first time. This article looks at what it...
New Cafcass guidance on working with children during COVID-19
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) has published guidance on working with children during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The guidance sets out arrangements for...
Remote hearings in family proceedings – how is justice perceived?
The motion for the recent Kingsley Napley debate:  “This House believes remote hearings are not remotely fair” was carried with a fairly balanced 56% in favour and 44% against....
Online event: An update on recovery in the civil, family courts & tribunals
HM Courts and Tribunals Service has announced that it is holding an online event to discuss its recovery plan for the civil, family courts and tribunals, which was published on 9 November 2020...
HM Courts & Tribunals Service confirms 2020 Christmas and new year closure dates
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has confirmed the dates over the Christmas and new year period in which Crown Courts, magistrates’ courts,...
View all articles
Authors

Children Act 1989, Sch 1: important developments: PG v TW

Sep 29, 2018, 18:45 PM
Slug : Todd-OctFLJ2013-1296
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Sep 25, 2013, 04:20 AM
Article ID : 103611

Philip Cayford QC and Jonathan Tod, 29 Bedford Row Chambers, London

Henry and Julius Brookman, Brookman Solicitors:

The High Court decisions in PG v TW (Nos 1 and 2) are significant for the scope and breadth of the issues they throw up under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989.  The litigation centred on the child of a prominent and gifted footballer, who has played (and still plays) at the highest level in England. Both father and mother originate from an African country, to which mother had already returned with the child.  Jurisdiction, a non-resident applicant, procedure, interim cost funding, the assessment of quantum in a foreign country, the ongoing significance of the carer's allowance, the millionaire's defence, capitalisation of a car fund, security, anonymity, Calderbank offers and the awarding of indemnity costs all featured. It was also the first time a court had considered the relatively new EU Maintenance Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 4/2009) in a Sch 1 context.

The full version of this article appears in the October 2013 issue of Family Law.

Categories :
  • Articles
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from