Go to Source
Author:
Mother wins appeal in desperate no direct contact case
VB v JD & Others is the latest in a never-ending sad litany of cases I have read over the years involving almost ceaseless litigation between parents over arrangements for their children. Of course, that is not to say that the parents are always the sole cause of that continued litigation – there may also be other factors, not least failures of the system to bring it to an earlier conclusion. But that does not make the cases any less sad.
VB v JD & Others concerned a mother’s appeal against an order stopping all direct contact with her 7½ year old daughter, ‘A’. The background to the case was that the parents separated in 2013, since when we are told that litigation between the parties has continued “almost without cease”. “The chronology of court hearings makes desperate reading.” Said Mr Justice Cohen, who heard the appeal. He went on: “The parents’ relationship with each other is non-existent.”
Initially the parents shared the care of A. The critical moment in the case, however, occurred in 2015 when the mother and A’s half-sister, ‘B’, alleged that the father had sexually abused B. B is the daughter of the mother and her former partner, and is now aged 17. The allegations were considered by the court in April 2015, when the district judge concluded:
“In the light of the clear view I have formed about B’s evidence, it must follow that I dismiss the allegations against the father. I am not able to say that nothing untoward happened. It is simply that the mother has wholly failed to discharge the burden of proving what she alleges.”
He also made this important observation:
“It seems to me to be a reasonable inference to draw that this mother appears determined, at any cost, to ensure that A has no contact or relationship with the father.”
At a further hearing in December 2015 the court directed that A should live with her father and stepmother. Since then, A has neither lived with her mother nor had staying contact, and all contact has been supervised.
For the sake of brevity I will now skip ahead to May 2017. In that month the father issued an application seeking a prohibited steps order against the mother and B, and for variation of the most recent child arrangements order. The application was prompted by the actions of the mother and, in particular, B, who had contacted Children’s Services, the police and A’s school, expressing concerns about A living with her father, who B alleged had sexually and physically abused her. These incidents continued until June 2017. Meanwhile, the mother continued to have contact with A without incident, until the father’s application was determined in February 2018.
The determination of the court was that the mother should have no direct contact with A. The essential reason for this was that the judge considered that it was the best way to protect A from the effects of the actions of her mother and B. The court also made an order prohibiting any further applications in relation to A for a period of three years. The mother appealed.
Mr Justice Cohen allowed the appeal. His reasons included:
- That the judge had not considered the possibility of there being very limited, as opposed to no, direct contact, for example two or three times a year.
- That whilst the events that led up to the father’s application were “disgraceful”, they were all outside contact and stopping contact would not, in itself, mean that those events do not recur.
- That to remove the mother from the child’s physical presence for three years, a child then aged 6, so half the child’s lifetime, is a very long time (and therefore not a step to be taken without very good reason).
In addition to the above, Mr Justice Cohen felt that in circumstances where contact itself was going well and enjoyed by the child, greater thought needed to be given to the instruction of a child psychiatrist, before coming to a decision. In short, he said: “To terminate a child’s relationship with the mother and sister is very draconian and it seems to me that this was a case where all available alternatives had not been fully explored.”
Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the case was remitted back to the court below for further consideration, although Mr Justice Cohen did have this warning for the mother and B:
“I do not know what the outcome of this case will be, but I make it clear that I find it hard to envisage contact for the foreseeable future occurring, if it does at all, with anything like the frequency that it has in the past. The mother and B have to prove themselves. Further complaints to the Social Services or police, whether done personally or through the agency of others, are, if unjustified, likely to lead to a longer cessation of any contact at all.”
You can read the full judgment here.
The post Mother wins appeal in desperate no direct contact case appeared first on Stowe Family Law.
Go to Source
Author: John Bolch
Teatro La Fenice

The phoenix of Venice
Throughout the night of January 29, 1996, a fire raged in the center of Venice, Italy, and by morning it had consumed its victim: the Teatro La Fenice, often called simply La Fenice. Luckily, the fire did not travel beyond the walls of La Fenice, but the destruction was profound. One of the great opera houses of Europe was gutted, and the city of Venice lost a treasured civic landmark.
Arriving by chance in Venice just days after the fire, celebrated author John Berendt set out to document the aftermath of the Fenice fire, interviewing local residents and city officials to find out what led up to the fire, and what long-term effect it might have on the city. As with his previous bestseller, Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil, which centered around a lurid murder in Savannah, Georgia, Berendt found many colorful characters and community intrigues in Venice to write about in addition to his main story. The result of Berendt’s research is the 2005 book The City of Falling Angels.
The fire of 1996 that Berendt details in The City of Falling Angels is a riveting event, a tragedy on a huge scale. But for the Teatro La Fenice, this catastrophe was yet one more chapter in its long and strange history.
Fire in the Hall
Translated from Italian, La Fenice means “the phoenix,” a reference to the mythological creature that is reborn from its ashes after it is destroyed. Long before the fire in 1996, La Fenice acquired this name because of another fire, one that burned down the Teatro San Benedetto in 1774. In response to the loss of the theater, a group of ex-proprietors of the San Benedetto, calling themselves the Noble Association of Boxholders, decided to sponsor the creation of a new theater, and invited proposals for its design. Completed in 1792, La Fenice was well received and greatly admired by the public and the media.
Only a few years after the Fenice was completed, in 1797, the French army, under Napoleon’s command, invaded and occupied Venice, placing it under both French and Austrian control. Although ownership was retained by those who had built the theater, it in effect became a state theater. In accordance with this, in 1807, La Fenice played host to the now-Emperor Napoleon; a special loggia was built to accommodate him, and the theater was decorated in the imperial colors of blue and silver.
Further changes to the theater were made in 1828, including the hanging of a new chandelier and additions of painting and sculpture. All this work put into the Fenice was destroyed on December 13, 1836, when the theater caught fire, reputedly sparked by a newly installed Austrian stove. The fire burned for three days and nights, and continued to smolder for another 15 days. On the heels of this disaster, reconstruction began quite quickly, under the direction of the Meduna brothers, Tommaso and Giambattista.
Disorder of the Phoenix
After the major rebuilding of 1836, other refinements and renovations were made to the Fenice, most notably in 1854 and 1937. At the time of the 1996 fire, major restoration work was again being carried out on the Fenice, and according to The City of Falling Angels, many believed the chaos that existed inside the theater during this time contributed to its destruction. Indeed, the prosecutor charged with going after those responsible for the fire, Felice Casson, first focused on the city officials he felt were negligent in keeping order on the project. Examples of this negligence included the lack of restrictions on access to the site and the presence of equipment and flammable materials left scattered around the site by work crews. Most critically, response to the fire was hampered by the lack of water in the adjacent canal, drained as part of a canal improvement plan; valuable time was lost in routing water from another canal to the scene of the fire.
Eventually, however, Casson charged two cousins—the owner and employee of a company hired to carry out electrical work on the Fenice—with arson, and both were found guilty of the crime. The motive for arson given by the prosecution was that the men were trying to avoid serious fines the company would have faced if it did not meet an upcoming work deadline.
Out of the Ashes
The mayor of Venice at the time of the fire, Massimo Cacciari, promised that the Fenice would be rebuilt “com’era, dov’era,” or “as it was, where it was.” This was easier said than done, considering the difficulties of construction work in the middle of a city without roads. All the building materials had to be brought in by boat, and a large platform was built in the main thoroughfare of Venice, the Grand Canal, upon which cement mixers and large equipment were stored. After stops and starts, and after the project had changed management mid-stream, the new Fenice hosted its inaugural performance on December 14, 2003.
It was one more chapter in the history of this world-famous opera house, the setting for premieres of works by Verdi, Bellini, Stravinsky, and Britten, and the scene of many notable performances by opera superstars such as Maria Callas and Joan Sutherland. Like a phoenix, La Fenice twice rose from the ashes to continue its important role in the life of Venice.
Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on October 2, 2006.
Image credit: Youflavio [CC BY-SA 4.0], via Wikimedia Commons
Go to Source
Author: Morgen Jahnke
National Chocolate Caramel Day

Regular readers know of my deep and abiding passion for chocolate. My wife has comparable feelings about caramel, whereas my own feelings about caramel are decidedly “meh.” In other situations, she and I might take a Jack Sprat approach and each eat only the portions of the food we find most delicious, but that’s remarkably difficult (and messy) with the combination of caramel and chocolate. So I think the right thing to do is for us to celebrate National Chocolate Caramel Day as a family. I get the chocolate, she gets the caramel, and we’re both happy.
Image credit: Lee McCoy [CC BY-ND 2.0], via Flickr
Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell
Share a Bed Without Losing Sleep
Go to Source
Author:
What is a collaborative divorce?
When one thinks of divorce, they often think about two spouses having a go at each other, unable to reach an agreement. While some divorces are high conflict and require the court to step in to sort through the various issues, others are able to come to terms and reach an agreement on their own. Although the couple is able to set aside their differences, they may still require assistance when it comes to working through the process and finalizing a divorce.
What is a collaborative divorce? The collaborative process is an alternative dispute resolution that is based on the concept of cooperation. In this process, both spouses have attorneys; however, they work outside the court to problem solve and reach an agreement. This is a result-focused process used to resolve both divorce and family law issues.
This process differs from mediation, as there is no neutral party helping the divorcing couple reach a resolution. The collaborative process is based on negotiation and cooperation; however, if the couple decides that the collaborative process is no longer working for them or cannot help them resolve all issues, then the couple will turn to the court. If litigation is set to begin, the attorneys that represented the couple during collaboration cannot represent them during litigation.
There is no correct way to divorce, as no two divorces are the same. The factors and issues involved in each divorce are unique and may require more work than others. Therefore, it is important that divorcing spouses understand their rights and options as they move through the divorce process. Whether that is through collaboration or through litigation or any other method, it is vital to understand what works best in your specific situation.
Go to Source
Author: On behalf of Katie L. Lewis of Katie L. Lewis, P.C. Family Law
Will divorce affect my credit rating?
Divorce and separation often focus on the division of assets: who gets the house? Maintenance for the children? However, many couples must also decide what happens to the debts, in joint and sole names, and ask the question: will divorce affect my credit rating?
Changing the legal status of your relationship does not affect your credit score directly, whether you are moving in, getting married, forming a civil partnership, separating or getting divorced.
However, it is likely that during your relationship you have taken out joint credit, be it a mortgage, a bank account with an overdraft facility, names on a utility bill or a loan. And if this is the case, your credit ratings will affect each other.
Why?
When you and your partner apply for credit together the lender will look at both of your credit files and scores. This is because with any joint credit each of you is legally responsible for all the debt and all the payments. So, if one of you cannot keep up with your share of the debt, the other is legally obliged to make the payments.
Financial connections
The shared debt will show up on your credit report (it is usually under the heading financial associations or financial connections).
Once listed, it may mean that in the future their credit report will also be taken into consideration on any future applications you make, even if it is in your sole name. And the association will remain if you have those joint debts. Getting divorced or separating will make no difference.
What can you do?
Until all joint debts are paid and accounts are closed you’re still financially linked, but you do have a couple of options:
Split the debt
If possible, sit down with your ex and get a clear picture of what you owe and who will take responsibility for what. You can then have the joint accounts transferred to the person who is solely responsible for the payments.
Look at your property
Often the biggest asset, you may need to refinance to remove one name from the mortgage or sell the home and divide the proceeds.
Keeping paying the bills
Money is likely to be tight as you separate but keep paying the bills. If you don’t have enough money to keep up payments on your loan(s), credit card(s), bills and mortgage or rent, it’s important to prioritise which you can pay. Don’t ignore your debt problems. They will not go away.
If you are struggling please visit the Money Advice Service website for further information and support.
Removing a financial association
Once you no longer share joint finances you can ask credit reference agencies to remove them from your credit report, this is known as a notice of disassociation. Be prepared to provide proof that your financial connection has ended.
Get in touch
If you are going through a divorce or separation and have debt concerns our highly experienced family lawyers can help. You can get in touch here.
The post Will divorce affect my credit rating? appeared first on Stowe Family Law.
Go to Source
Author: Emma Newman
Why the continued rise in private law children cases?
Most months I briefly mention here the latest monthly statistics from Cafcass for care applications and private law demand. I did so last Friday. As regular readers may have noticed, the figures for private law demand have been heading inexorably upwards. I thought it might be time to have a closer look at those figures, and speculate as to what may be behind the rise.
Please note at the outset that I use the word ‘speculate’. I do so on purpose. I fully acknowledge that any thoughts I may have as to what is behind the figures are formulated on the basis of my own limited knowledge, but I simply do not have the time or resources to make a detailed investigation. Still, I have been following closely what has been happening in the family justice system for quite a few years now, and so hopefully I have something useful to add to the debate.
Before I proceed I should set out what is meant by ‘private law demand’. This is explained by Cafcass as follows:
“Private law demand is generally used to refer to applications made following a divorce or separation about the arrangements for children, such as where a child will live or with whom a child will spend time.”
Cafcass goes on to explain exactly what the figures mean:
“In private law the unit of measurement is a case (note a case can involve multiple children and multiple application types). These are counted upon receipt of the application from the court and entry into the [Cafcass] database.”
To go into just a little more detail for the benefit of those who don’t know, this does not mean that every private law (i.e. not made by a local authority) court application relating to arrangements for children (including for prohibited steps and specific issue orders) is included as soon as the application is made. Only when the court has considered the case and decided that a court welfare officer’s report is required is the application referred to Cafcass. Admittedly, this does include most applications, but some, particularly simple cases, or cases where the parents are agreed, or are close to agreement, will not be referred to Cafcass. For example, in the third quarter of 2018 (the last full quarter for which family court statistics have been published by the Ministry of Justice) the family courts received 13,444 private law children applications, whereas during that period only 11,411 applications were received by Cafcass (yes, I know that some of the applications may have been issued before that quarter, but you take my point – hopefully!). In short, a Cafcass case is likely to be a case that is contested by the parents, at least at the outset.
OK, so what do the statistics from Cafcass say? Well, I won’t go into all of the details (which you can find at the link below), but essentially private law demand has been increasing each year since 2013, the year that legal aid was abolished for most private law matters (more of which in just a moment). Thus between April 2014 and March 2015 Cafcass received a total of 34,119 new private law cases, increasing to 37,415 the next year, 40,536 the year after that and 41,844 in the year to March 2018. These figures represented year-on-year increases of 10%, 8% and 3.3%.
And the increases have continued since then. For example, the latest figure, for last month, was 20.2% higher than February 2018. Cafcass say that they consider this figure to be an ‘outlier’ compared to recent years (they don’t explain why they think this), but other recent monthly figures have also been higher, albeit not usually by quite so much.
I should say at this point that the increased demand reported by Cafcass is reflected by the Ministry of Justice’s statistics, although the latter are not as recent.
Alright, so what is behind the continued rise?
I will assume in what follows that the increase is not due to any population changes, whether in numbers or demographics. Certainly, I am not aware of any such changes, and in any event they surely wouldn’t have occurred over such a short period.
I also think we can dismiss the idea that there have been more relationship breakdowns since 2013. We don’t of course have figures for breakdowns of cohabiting relationships, but the number of couples divorcing has actually decreased over recent years. Whatever, there is nothing to suggest that relationship breakdown is in the rise.
Obviously, a big factor in the rise is what I will call the ‘bounce-back’ from the downtown following the abolition of legal aid. To explain, just before legal aid was abolished there was a surge in applications, with parents trying to get their cases in while they could still get legal aid. After legal aid was abolished, there was a corresponding drop in the number of applications. Clearly, that could not continue, hence the rise in applications since.
But the duration of the increase in private law demand seems to have been far longer than could be explained simply by ‘bounce-back’. Surely, that would have run its course after a couple of years (by, say, 2016)? There seems to be another factor, or other factors, at work.
Lack of lawyers to ‘weed out’ applications, either because they are without merit or, more commonly, because the lawyers help parents settle matters without going to court, must surely be one of those factors. We know, for example, that the number of cases being referred to mediation has dropped dramatically since the abolition of legal aid, as lawyers are no longer there to refer cases to mediation (or, more accurately, to advise parties as to the existence and benefits of mediation). Without lawyers, parents are rushing off to court when perhaps they don’t need to.
Which brings me to my last point. Are parents increasingly being encouraged to go to court by non-lawyer ‘advisers’? Without the availability of lawyers parents are often having to turn to unqualified people for assistance. Could it be that those people are advising them to argue matters when they shouldn’t (either because they don’t have a good case, or simply because the matter should be capable of being agreed), and then to go to court when either they shouldn’t, or it shouldn’t be necessary?
I’m sure there are factors that I’ve missed, and that others will disagree with some or all of my points (one matter I haven’t looked at is whether there are differences in the situation in different parts of the country, something covered by the data published by Cafcass). Still, this is clearly a discussion that we need to have, as it obviously impacts upon the ability of the court to deal with cases in a timely fashion, particularly at a time when resources are scarce.
You can see the latest statistics for private law demand here (click on ‘Monthly statistics’ and/or ‘Annual summaries’ – note that this page updates every month).
The post Why the continued rise in private law children cases? appeared first on Stowe Family Law.
Go to Source
Author: John Bolch
Microclimates

Don’t like the weather? Cross the street.
I have lived in many different parts of North America, but most of my time has been spent on the west coast, no more than a few miles from the ocean. There are many things to like about the west coast, but I’m especially fond of the weather. Each city has its specialty—San Diego is famous for sun, San Francisco for fog, and Vancouver for rain. But what this entire strip of land has in common is a relatively temperate climate year-round. Summers are rarely hot, and snow is almost unheard of. Some of my friends complain about the lack of seasonal variation, but not me. I figure, I can go and visit the snow or the sun for a week or two every year if I really miss it—and that’s enough for me.
Besides, we do have seasons, just not the same kinds of seasons as the rest of the continent. In San Francisco, for example, where I lived for quite a few years, the months of June through August are usually cool, especially near the ocean; the hottest month is October. Tourists invariably get this wrong, shivering in shorts in the summer and sweating in the fall. But the city’s generally mild climate has another interesting twist that makes it difficult for a resident to give a meaningful answer when someone from another part of the world asks me how the weather is.
Artificial and Natural Diversity
San Francisco is not a large city. Located on the tip of a peninsula with the Pacific Ocean on the west and the San Francisco Bay on the east, the city is only about 7 miles (11.3km) square. The famously steep hills contribute to an illusion of greater size—as if what the city lacks in width, it makes up for in height. Although it is nicely compact, San Francisco is composed of numerous distinct neighborhoods that are often profoundly different from each other in terms of architecture, culture, ethnicity, and overall demographics. Chinatown, for example, is just steps away from North Beach (San Francisco’s version of Little Italy), yet the local vibes of the two areas could not be more different. But as you move around San Francisco, you may notice something even more striking than the varying neighborhoods: major shifts in weather. San Francisco is often held out as a textbook example of microclimates.
A microclimate is a weather pattern that’s localized in a small area and different in some significant way from the weather of nearby areas. The variation can be one of temperature, humidity, rainfall, wind, or any combination of these. For example, there are parts of San Francisco that barely see the sun all summer long; along the coast, especially, it’s frequently cold, foggy, and windy. In other parts of the city, though, fog is virtually unknown; it may be sunny and 10 or even 20 degrees hotter than spots just a mile or two away. In all, there are about 30 well-defined microclimate regions within the city, and even more when you travel slightly farther away. When I was living in San Francisco and commuting to work just south of the city, I often drove out of rain and into sunshine or vice versa, but nearly always found the southern parts of the peninsula much warmer than in San Francisco.
You Don’t Need a Weather Man to Know Which Way the Wind Blows
There are many reasons for microclimates, but they all boil down to three main causes: water, hills, and concrete. Large bodies of water affect the climate both by increasing the humidity and by stabilizing the temperature in the immediate area. But even small ponds or pools, in the right location, can have a noticeable effect on the climate. This is especially true if there are large hills nearby. Hills block wind and redirect air currents, holding in both moisture and pockets of cool air. (This is also why temperate rain forests are able to thrive even when the greater region in which they’re located is too dry.) The concept of “city heat,” too, is well known; large expanses of concrete and stone absorb heat in the day and release it at night, making the average temperature in a city warmer than in adjacent areas. All these factors in combination with the area’s patterns of topography and vegetation contribute to the formation of microclimates.
Although San Francisco’s microclimates are numerous and conspicuous, the phenomenon is by no means unique to that area—it occurs, to varying extents, just about everywhere there are hills, large bodies of water, or other topographical features that can influence temperature and humidity. Depending on your point of view, they can be a curiosity, an aggravation, or a blessing. Weather forecasts for San Francisco are often misleading if not meaningless, because there’s so much variation throughout the city. On the other hand, in some areas microclimates make it possible to grow certain plants that could not survive just a few blocks away. San Francisco’s microclimates don’t reach the extremes of seasonal variation in the northeast part of the country, so residents still have to drive or fly if they need a real season fix. But as long as they don’t feel the need to shovel snow or rake leaves, nearly any weather they could want is just minutes away.
Note: This is an updated version of an article that originally appeared on Interesting Thing of the Day on July 4, 2003, and again in a slightly revised form on June 22, 2004.
Image credit: Brocken Inaglory [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons
Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell
National Sloppy Joe Day

You might say my relationship with the Sloppy Joe is complicated. I always felt a bit uneasy having such an uncomplimentary adjective placed next to my name, for one thing. Then there was the first version of this food I was introduced to, back in my elementary school cafeteria: an unappetizing mixture of ground beef, tomato sauce, and way too many yucky chunks of vegetables slapped onto a dry hamburger bun. Gross. I can’t remember the last time I ate a Sloppy Joe, and I won’t do so today, either. I’m sure I could construct a palatable version of this sandwich for myself, but then, if I had those ingredients on hand I’d much more likely make a burger, or perhaps some delicious chili. But hey, if you’re a Sloppy Joe fan, knock yourself out today. As for me, I’ll be waiting nine days for the holiday that cleans up my name: National Joe Day (coming up on March 27).
Image credit: Buck Blues [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons
Go to Source
Author: Joe Kissell