Spotlight
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'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
Re R (Children) (Control of Court Documents) [2021] EWCA Civ 162
(Court of Appeal (Civil Division), King, Peter Jackson, Elisabeth Laing LJJ, 12 February 2021)Practice and Procedure – Disclosure of court documents – Sexual abuse findings –...
AG v VD [2021] EWFC 9
(Family Court, Cohen J, 04 February 2021) Financial Remedies – Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984, Part III – Russian divorceThe wife was awarded just under £6m...
Become the new General Editor of The Family Court Practice, the definitive word on family law and procedure
The Family Court Practice (‘The Red Book’) is widely acknowledged as the leading court reference work for all family practitioners and the judiciary. We are currently recruiting a...
SCTS releases new simplified divorce and dissolution forms for Scotland
The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS) has released new simplified divorce and dissolution forms of application. As a result of legislation repealing Council Regulation EC 2201/2003, the...
Welsh Government launches consultation on amendments to adoption regulations
The Welsh Government has launched a consultation on the proposed amendments to the Adoption Agencies (Wales) Regulations 2005 and the Care Planning, Placement and Case Review (Wales) Regulations 2015....
View all articles
Authors

CHILD SUPPORT: Child Support Agency v Forrest [2010] EWCA Civ

Sep 29, 2018, 17:53 PM
Slug : child-support-child-support-agency-v-forrest-2010-ewca-civ
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : May 24, 2010, 12:00 PM
Article ID : 90957

(Court of Appeal; Elias LJ and Keith J; 14 May 2010)

The father was charged with failing to comply with a request for information made by the Child Support Agency (CSA) under the Child Support Act 1991, s 14A, contrary to s 14A(3).The information was considered to be relevant for purposes of the CSA forming a view as to the payments to be made to the mother in respect of the child's maintenance.  The justices found that the father had a reasonable excuse, within s 14A(4) for not providing the requested information, namely that to do so would put the mother at risk of criminal prosecution. Section 15(7) of the Act, which provides that no-one is to be required to provide information tending to incriminate himself or their civil partner or spouse was not referred to by the justices.  The CSA appealed. 

Held that the defence of self-incrimination or protection from incrimination of another person was not in principle capable of constituting a defence of reasonable excuse within s 14A(4). The case was remitted to the justices to consider whether any other defence is applicable.

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