Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles

RESIDENCE: Re F (Shared Residence Order) [2009]

Sep 29, 2018, 17:22 PM
Slug : re-f-shared-residence-order-2009
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Mar 3, 2009, 09:06 AM
Article ID : 86257

(Court of Appeal; Ward, Longmore and Moore-Bick LJJ; 3 March 2009)

The parents had two children. The couple separated for a period of 18 months during which the father was the primary carer; the mother had problems with alcohol and drugs. The parents then reconciled for a further 3 years, after which the mother moved out of the family home, taking the children with her, and settled in a different town. The father applied for a residence order. The evidence at the hearing was that both parents could meet the children's needs, that the children would thrive in either household, and that both parents were capable of caring for the children more than adequately. The Cafcass officer recommended a shared residence order. The judge made a shared residence order on the basis that the children were to live with the father, but stay with the mother on alternate weekends, plus one extra weekend every 8 weeks, and for half the school holidays, plus all the half-term breaks. The mother appealed on the basis that the status quo was with her, and that the children should therefore not be removed without good reason.

The appeal was dismissed. The judge had been entitled to come to the conclusions he had reached. Since the enactment of the Children Act 1989, it was better to address the check-list factors than to rely on any presumption of fact that might arise from status quo arguments; such arguments merely meant that if children were settled in one place, the court had to have regard to s 1(3)(b) of the 1989 Act, and consider the likely effect on the children of any change in circumstance.

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