Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
Spotlight
A day in the life Of...
Edward Bennett
Edward Bennett
Barrister
Read on
G v S [2017] EWHC 365 (Fam)
Date:7 MAR 2017
Third slide
Law Reporter

(Family Division, Hayden J, 24 February 2017)

Financial remedies – Sch 1, Children Act 1989 – Proposed restriction on mother’s ability to relocate overseas – Consent order

The court resolved a number of issues in Sch 1, Children Act 1989 proceedings.

The Swedish mother and American father of the 2-year-old child were in a relationship for 2 years and separated the year after the child was born. The father now lived in Switzerland while the mother and child remained in England.

The mother brought proceedings under Sch 1 of the Children Act 1989 and the parties were able to agree on most issues. The father would provide a housing fund of £2.1m and maintenance of £160,000 pa. However, the court was asked to determine a number of unresolved points including one term of the proposed order which prevented the mother from purchasing a property outside of the jurisdiction until she had concluded primary education.

The court held, inter alia, that the prohibition sought by the father was wrong in principle and contrary to the guidance set out in Re P (Child: Financial Provision) [2003] 2 FLR 865. Even if the parties had agreed the court should not impose such a restriction.


Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWHC 365 (Fam)

Case No: ZC15P04036

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
FAMILY DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL


Date: 24/02/2017

Before :

MR JUSTICE HAYDEN

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

G
Applicant

- and -

S
Respondent

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr R Harrison QC (instructed by Hughes Fowler Carruthers) for the Applicant
Ms D Bangay QC (instructed by Clintons) for the Respondent

Hearing dates: 31st January & 8th February 2017

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Judgment Approved

This judgment was delivered in private. The judge has given leave for this version of the judgment to be published on condition that (irrespective of what is contained in the judgment) in any published version of the judgment the anonymity of the children and members of their family must be strictly preserved. All persons, including representatives of the media, must ensure that this condition is strictly complied with. Failure to do so will be a contempt of court.


G v S [2017] EWHC 365 (Fam).rtf
Family Law
Family Law
"the principal (monthly) periodical dealing with...
£389
Financial Remedies Handbook
Financial Remedies Handbook
Formerly entitled the Ancillary Relief Handbook...
£91.99
Family Law Reports
Family Law Reports
"The unrivalled and authoritative source of...
£509.99