Category: Divorce

Posted on

Father succeeds in appeal against findings after social worker found to be biased

As I have explained here recently, often in private law family proceedings relating to children the court is required to make findings regarding allegations that one parent makes against the other, and those findings can have a crucial bearing upon the outcome of the case. Obviously, therefore, a parent aggrieved at the court’s findings may wish to appeal against them. However, it can be very difficult for that parent to prove that the judge’s findings were wrong.

That, however, is what happened in the Court of Appeal case P-G (Children), and for rather worrying reasons. The case was heard in 2015, but the judgment has only recently been published on the Bailii website. The case also has something important to say about the usefulness of fact-finding hearings in these cases generally.

The case concerned cross-applications by both parents for orders that their two daughters, then aged 7 and 5, reside with them. The mother made various allegations against the father, which included sexually inappropriate conduct towards the mother; controlling behaviour such that the mother lost contact with her family and friends and which was also hostile and intimidating; verbal abuse; shouting and swearing at the mother, sometimes in front of children; throwing a “lump of cheese” at the mother, which hit a wall; swearing at and kicking the family dog; and swearing and shouting at the older child. The father did not deny all of the allegations, but argued that where incidents had taken place the mother was exaggerating, elaborating or taking the incident out of context.

A fact-finding hearing took place to determine the truth of the allegations. The judge found in favour of the mother. In doing so he took into account the contents of two reports from a social worker, which supported the mother’s allegations.

The father complained to the local authority that the social worker had been biased. The local authority upheld the complaint, finding that an injustice had been caused to the father for which financial compensation should be considered. The social worker had believed the mother, without checking or analysing the source material, or setting out the father’s contrary case or explanation.

The father appealed against the findings of fact, to the Court of Appeal. Giving the leading judgment Lord Justice Ryder found that the social worker’s reports were tainted evidence, which the judge had relied on when making his findings. There was a strong perception of unfairness, which meant that the findings had to be set aside. Accordingly, the father’s appeal was allowed.

However, Lord Justice Ryder had another observation to make. He said:

“It is not the case that all factual disputes between parents need to be resolved as a precondition to the issue of contact being determined by the Family Court. That simplistic formulation leads to unnecessary hearings and interminable delay for the children concerned. An acute scrutiny is necessary during case management of the disputes that the parties want to resolve. There may be an imperative of protection that needs to be considered or provided for a victim or a child, and Practice Directions 12B and 12J of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 are written with that imperative in mind. Nothing I say is intended to suggest otherwise. That said, there are many private law children cases where protection is not the critical issue. The findings of fact proposed will add little or nothing to the value judgment that the court has to undertake but will cause the child to lose the quality of a relationship with one of her parents that should exist.”

He went on:

“This is arguably one such case. The nature and extent of the findings of fact, even if made, would not, in my judgment, prevent direct contact between the children and their father”

Lord Justice McCombe agreed, saying:

“I have been concerned as to the likelihood of the fact-finding exercise conducted in this case providing any sensible information as to the desirability of contact between father and his children and/or the nature of that contact.”

And Lord Justice Elias also agreed:

“I too have found it difficult to understand why this expensive and time-consuming fact-finding exercise, raking over particular incidents in an acrimonious relationship between the parents, has any real bearing on the question of contact between the father and his children.”

Obviously, in any acrimonious parental separation allegations are likely to be made by one or both parties against the other. However, in many (most?) cases the allegations, even if true, are not of a nature that they should affect the outcome of the case. In other words, in such cases the court should ignore the animosity, and concentrate on the main issue: what is best for the welfare of the children.

You can find the full judgment here.

The post Father succeeds in appeal against findings after social worker found to be biased appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch

Posted on

Further detail on the divorce reform released

The government has now provided more details about its proposed reforms to the current divorce law in England and Wales.

At the moment, the only way to obtain a divorce is to prove that the marriage has broken down irretrievably and to do so by relying upon one or more reasons, or “facts.” These include the other person’s adultery or “unreasonable behaviour.” 60% of divorce petitions rely on one of these and blame the other party.

The three remaining reasons are two years separation and the other person’s consent or five year’s separation without consent and the barely used desertion.

Announcing the introduction of “no-fault” divorce, the government proposes to abolish all those reasons and replace them with just one ground, namely a statement from one, or both parties, that their marriage has broken down irretrievably.

It will be impossible to defend or resist a divorce in future.

There has been a considerable amount of research which suggests only too clearly the enormous damage which the current system of “blame” inflicts on families, the couple themselves as well as their children.

There has also been an enormous amount of pressure on successive governments to reform the divorce law in this country which has been in place for 50 years since the last time parliament was involved in 1969.

The proposals announced today represent radical social change, bring the law up-to-date and deserve widespread support both inside and outside the Houses of Parliament.

Similar reforms will be made in relation to the dissolution of civil partnerships.

There will still be a two-stage process which will have a minimum timeframe of six months. At the end of that period, the applicant for the divorce will need to affirm their decision to seek a divorce. The government explains that this will “provide a meaningful period of reflection and the opportunity to turn back.”

What is not known yet is, if and how that period might be extended. For example, will the divorce only be finalised once arrangements for any children have been made and financial matters resolved?

Our own internal research revealed last year that there was enormous support from practising family lawyers for reforms such as those announced today.

No timescale for legislation has been announced.

The hope must be that even in the present turbulent political climate that parliament will make sure it finds time to make sure that these proposals become law very soon.

GRAHAM COY
Tuesday, 9 April 2019

The post Further detail on the divorce reform released appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Graham Coy

Posted on

Husband not bound by terms of pre-nuptial agreement

In 2010 the Supreme Court held that, whilst pre-nuptial agreements are not binding in this country, the court should usually give effect to them, unless their terms are unfair. The effect of that ruling has been that many pre-nuptial agreements have since been upheld by our courts, and this has been reflected in the reported cases. However, the recent case Ipekçi v McConnell was an example of the court giving no weight to an agreement.

A look at this case must begin with the background of the parties.

The wife is the great-granddaughter of the founder of the Avon Products business empire. As Mr Justice Mostyn, who heard the case, explained, the vast amount of money generated by the business for the family means that, along with other relatives, the wife is the beneficiary of trusts in the USA with an overall value of at least $65 million. Now, as one might imagine, the trusts, and therefore the wife’s finances, were rather complicated. For the purpose of this post I will not go into those complications. Suffice to say that the wife is, by most measurements, comfortably well off.

The husband, in contrast, is the head concierge of the London Hilton Metropole hotel, earning about £35,000 gross. He has no net capital.

The parties met in New York in 2003, at which time the husband had no money beyond his earnings. The wife lived in London. They began cohabitation in January 2005. They agreed to marry, and a pre-nuptial agreement was suggested, and drafted by the wife’s lawyer. A lawyer was found to give the husband independent legal advice. Rather worryingly, this lawyer happened to be the solicitor who acted for the wife in her divorce from her first husband. The husband met the lawyer for the first time on the 3rd of November 2005, just three weeks before the marriage, which had been fixed to take place on the 26th of November.

The terms of the agreement were also slightly complicated. Again, I will not go into the details, but the effect of the agreement was that the husband would, in the circumstances that subsequently arose, not receive anything on divorce. Needless to say, the husband was advised that the agreement was slanted heavily in favour of the wife. Despite this, he signed it on the 11th of November.

The marriage eventually broke down, and the parties separated in November 2016. Divorce proceedings ensued, and the husband issued a financial remedies application. The application was heard by Mr Justice Mostyn in the High Court.

Mr Justice Mostyn had to decide, as a preliminary issue, what weight, if any, should be given to the pre-nuptial agreement. He had “no hesitation” in deciding that it would be wholly unfair to hold the husband to the agreement. His reasons for this included the following:

  1. The agreement specifically stated that it would be governed by New York law. However, there was a defect with the agreement under New York law, which meant that would carry little or no weight there.
  2. The husband could not be said to have had a full appreciation of the implications of the agreement, having had no legal advice at all about the impact of New York law. Further, Mr Justice Mostyn was unsurprisingly not satisfied that the solicitor who gave the advice was not compromised, by virtue of having acted previously for the wife in her first divorce. It was, he said, a clear situation of apparent bias.
  3. The agreement did not meet any needs of the husband.

Mr Justice Mostyn then went on to decide what the husband was entitled to. He awarded him a lump sum of £1,333,500, of which £375,000 was subject to a charge-back to the wife (or her estate), on the death of the husband.

The case is a reminder of just what the Supreme Court said in 2010: that the courts in this country are not bound by pre-nuptial agreements, and that if it is to be upheld any agreement must be freely entered into by each party, with a full appreciation of its implications, and be fair. And one of the elements of that fairness is that is that the agreement must address the needs of the parties.

You can read the full judgment here.

The post Husband not bound by terms of pre-nuptial agreement appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch

Posted on

Major divorce reform to be announced

As reported early this morning, Justice Secretary David Gauke has confirmed new legislation will be introduced which will scrap the ability of a partner to contest divorce and allow divorcing spouses to state that the marriage has broken down irretrievably without allocating blame.

Graham Coy, Partner at the Stowe Family Law London Chancery Lane office joins us to share his initial thoughts on this announcement this morning.

“50 years after the law was last changed, the Government is announcing today radical changes to the way in which couples can bring to an end their marriage.

Hopefully, this will also apply to civil partnerships.

The need to “blame” the other husband or wife will be abolished. 60% of all divorces are based upon blame at the moment.

Instead, one or both parties will be able to give one another and the court that their marriage has broken down irretrievably.

It will be impossible to resist or defend the divorce process.

The divorce will be finalised no earlier than 6 months later.

The details of the reform are not known as yet but this is a major step forward in making what is a very difficult period in the life of so many families  far less stressful.

The children involved will also benefit as a result of the decrease in anger, tension and acrimony between their parents.

A major and welcome social reform.”

The post Major divorce reform to be announced appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Graham Coy

Posted on

Divorce reform must not get left behind

This morning I noted that the media had picked back up the calls for divorce reform.

Influenced I am sure by the announcement yesterday that Chair Margaret Heathcote was to outline her concerns in a speech at Resolution’s annual conference in Manchester today.

One of Ms Heathcote’s main concerns is the danger that reform will fall by the wayside because MPs are tied-up with debating Brexit. And I for one, agree with her completely.

Now, we all have differing views about Brexit but one very real consequences of the endless wrangles at Westminster is that many other important issues are just forgotten altogether.

One of those is divorce reform.

Eventually, last September, the Government gave in to pressure from many quarters and committed to introducing ‘no-fault’ divorce.

Judges, barrister, solicitors and countless others had been campaigning for years to see the abolition of ‘blame’ at the very start of the divorce process. As things stand, the overwhelming number of divorces are based upon the behaviour or the adultery of the other person.

This leads to more unhappiness, misery and acrimony for couples who are already going through one of the most stressful periods in their lives. Inevitably, this affects any children involved.

Today in Manchester, the Chair of Resolution, the body which represents the majority of specialist family solicitors, Margaret Heathcote, urged the Government to fulfil its commitment.

She said,

“If you’re separating, and you’re faced with having to make unnecessary and unhelpful accusations against your ex on the divorce petition, there is nothing more important than this reform in the law.”

She went on to add that

“otherwise, every day that passes sees thousands of couples at risk of needless acrimony and denied the right to a kinder divorce process.”

The role of Government and the purpose of the law is to protect its citizens and make their lives easier where it is possible to do so and not to inflict unnecessary harm and damage children’s lives, possibly forever.

Stowe Family Law is the largest specialist family law firm in the country and we are part of the campaign to see divorce law changed and will continue to press for this much needed and long-delayed reform.

Graham Coy, London Chancery Lane 

The post Divorce reform must not get left behind appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Graham Coy

Posted on

Husband’s mother fails in claim that she was the real owner of the business

In a financial remedy claim following divorce the court can obviously only deal with property that belongs to one or both of the parties. Property that actually belongs to someone else is not part of the claim. As might be imagined, it is a common scenario that someone other than the husband and wife, often another family member, claims to own property that would otherwise be subject to the claim. In such a case, the court must decide as a preliminary issue who actually owns the property, before it decides the financial remedy claim itself.

That was the task facing Mr Justice Mostyn in the recent case Rothschild v Charmaine De Souza.

Now, before I describe the case I should explain that its facts are a little complex, as they often are when family businesses are involved. I will therefore be simplifying the facts of the case for the purpose of this post, to make it easier to follow. In particular, I will assume that there was only one business throughout the history of the case, whereas in reality there were several businesses.

The case revolved around who owned the family business. Was it owned by the husband and the wife equally, as the relevant paperwork suggested, or was it actually owned by the husband’s mother, as she claimed?

The business, a company, was incorporated in 1999. Its two issued one-penny shares were transferred from the formation agents to the husband and the wife. Thereafter all of the documentation relating to the company, including documentation signed by the husband, indicated that it was held 50:50 by the husband and the wife. Certainly, the husband did not, in any of that documentation, indicate that the true owner of the business was his mother.

The marriage broke down and the parties separated in September 2016. Divorce proceedings then ensued, along with financial remedy proceedings.

Within the financial remedy proceedings the husband was required to prepare a financial statement (‘Form E’), setting out details of his finances, including all of his assets. A draft of the Form E was delivered in April 2017, and this was the first time that the husband asserted that the business was owned by his mother. His mother was made a party to the proceedings and, as explained, the issue of the true ownership of the business fell to Mr Justice Mostyn to decide.

Perhaps the most interesting part of Mr Justice Mostyn’s judgment is the initial section (paragraphs 1 to 7), in which he explains his task, and how the court goes about deciding what he called (using a term that a lay person would understand) who ‘really owned’ the company. If you would like a plain-English introduction to what can be a horrendously complex area of law then I would recommend that you read those paragraphs. It all boils down to the difference between being a ‘formal owner’ (i.e. the owner according to the documentation, for example the deeds, in the case of land) and the real owner – it is quite often the case that, for various reasons, the two people are quite different.

In fact, Mr Justice Mostyn’s task in this case was not that difficult (or at least that’s how his judgment reads to someone who has never sat in judgment of anyone or anything!). The evidence clearly pointed to the business being owned equally by the husband and the wife. Mr Justice Mostyn listed examples of facts indicating that the business had been treated and represented as being in the ownership of the husband and wife (at paragraph 23 of his judgment). He called the list a ‘formidable catalogue’. In other words, they very strongly pointed in the direction of the business being owned by the husband and the wife.

Faced with this unpleasant truth, the husband’s mother turned against her son, alleging that he had ‘gone rogue’, by holding himself out as the owner of, and dealing with, her property, when he had no authority to do so. Mr Justice Mostyn was having none of it: the husband had not gone rogue, in asserting to the world, including to tax authorities, and moneylenders, that he was, with the wife, the real owner of the business – he was speaking the truth. In any event, if they did not have any interest in the business, why would the husband and the wife have devoted their working lives to it?

Accordingly Mr Justice Mostyn concluded as follows:

“My very clear and strong finding on the evidence is that, at least from the time of the creation of the [company], it was the common intention of [the husband] and [the wife] that the business … would be owned 50:50 by them. [The husband’s mother] knew of this and went along with it.”

He therefore made an order declaring that the business belonged to the husband and the wife in equal shares.

His full judgment can be read here.

The post Husband’s mother fails in claim that she was the real owner of the business appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch

Posted on

Tricky business: How do you work out what the family business is worth?

Divorce, whatever the circumstances, can be a tricky business but when a family or one of the partners runs their own business, things can be even more complicated.

One of the first stumbling blocks is working out an accurate valuation of the business. You cannot look at the division of a business without an understanding of its value.    

So, we asked Mark Heppinstall from the Stowe Family Law office in Ilkley, who is regularly instructed by business owners, or the spouses of business owners, to join us to explain the best way to get an accurate valuation.

“I am often asked by my clients whether there is a need to have any sole or shared business valued in the event of a divorce or separation.

To answer this, people need to understand that a business is something that can be considered by the Court as one of the financial resources that are available in a case, irrespective of whether the business is considered a matrimonial or non-matrimonial resource.

How to value a business

If a valuation is needed, in matrimonial cases it will usually be undertaken by a single joint expert acting on behalf of both parties. However, before instructing an expert, there are certain steps that should be taken first.

There should be consideration of full business accounts for the last two financial years, which applies to sole traders as much as it does to partnerships, LLP’s or shareholders in limited companies.

If a business is incorporated, abbreviated accounts can often be accessed online from Companies House. This contains easily accessible information that either party can review digitally at the touch of a button.

Whilst a useful overview, these are no replacement for full company accounts, which are usually much more informative and should include the full profit and loss account, balance sheet, detailed notes to the accounts and reports on behalf of the accountants and directors.

This information gives more context to the performance of a business than publicly accessible abbreviated accounts. Unsurprisingly, abbreviated accounts tend to be more concise and therefore might only tell part of the story.

A word of caution, it is worth bearing in mind that by the time business accounts or financial statements are available the data may be historic and could be out of date. Therefore, it is worth cross-checking this information against more current management accounts. This can help give both parties more confidence in a valuation and enable them to make more informed decisions without the need to instruct an expert.  

Additionally, if I am acting for a client who has an interest in a business, I often advise them to obtain a letter from their accountant to comment upon its value, which can assist in narrowing the issues in dispute. This can really help, although the flip side is that the spouse may be wary about relying on a company accountant’s valuation unless there is corroborating evidence from a single joint expert. Nevertheless it can help to explain how the valuation of the client’s interest in the business has been assessed.

I commonly see this if there is disagreement about how the business has been valued, or in cases where a spouse is less familiar with the business, which sometimes means they have less confidence in the accountant’s interpretation of its value.

If you cannot agree, how can the court help?

In most cases, after taking the above steps it is possible for an agreement on valuation to be reached. However, where this is not possible, the Court’s expectation is that expert evidence should be considered from a single joint expert instructed by both parties.

The question for the Court is whether it is necessary to instruct an expert.  If the Court is satisfied that an expert should be instructed, common practice is to instruct an independent accountant with no prior knowledge of the company in question. Although it would be expected that they should have sufficient knowledge of the market or sector in which the business operates.

Strictly speaking, there is no mandatory requirement for the Court’s permission to be obtained before an expert is instructed. However, permission is needed before expert evidence can be put before the Court.

If there is a dispute about whether to instruct an expert, this should be addressed at an early stage in a Court timetable and ideally no later than the first hearing. The Court will weigh up the cost and delay of instructing an expert against the potential value of a party’s interest in the business and the relevance of this in the context of the other matrimonial assets available.

The scope of an expert’s instruction should be carefully considered and could include the value of a spouse’s interest in a business, the extent to which this value is realisable (i.e. liquidity), the future maintainable income of the business and any tax consequences associated with a sale or disposition.

I often remind my client’s that the value of a business should be treated with caution and it is not realistic to compare a business valuation to property or other matrimonial assets.

Property is generally easier to value, easier to sell and convert to liquid capital and therefore more readily realisable. Business valuations are generally more uncertain, there is greater potential for change, they are typically regarded as more risk-laden and the sale of a business might affect a party’s earning capacity or future income; unlike the sale of a property.

The bigger financial picture

In view of this, clients should bear in mind that it can be misleading to treat a spouse’s interest in a business as a capital asset in isolation. Sometimes, it makes more sense to consider the income a spouse can draw from a business, which can be relevant when considering maintenance. Maintenance that could well be guillotined if a client was forced to sell their interest in a business to realise it’s capital value.

What is clear is that there is no one size fits all approach and each case will be based on its own facts. Sometimes a valuation from a single joint expert can really help, but all too often parties can jump to this starting point without first taking sensible and proportionate steps to consider whether this is necessary.”

Get in touch 

If you are separating from your partner and either you or your spouse hold an interest in a business, it is important to take early advice tailored to your specific circumstances.

At Stowe Family Law we work closely with our in-house forensic accountants to ensure that all bases are covered in this respect.

If you would like to get in touch with Mark you can email him at  Mark.Heppinstall@stowefamilylaw.co.uk or please do contact our Client Care Team at the details below.

The post Tricky business: How do you work out what the family business is worth? appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Mark Heppinstall

Posted on

12 of the best books to help children cope with divorce

As recent statistics from the Ministry of Justice revealed that divorce rates have gone up by 8% 2017 v 2018 and it is regularly quoted that close to 50% of marriages end, divorce is not unusual.

However, for the families behind the statistics, it is incredibly unusual. There is no set pattern, no rule book on how to deal with it and no guide on the best things to say. And whilst children will have friends whose parents have divorced and people in the wider family, depending on their age they may have no personal insight into what the term actually means.

Through my experience of working with families going through a divorce, I have seen a positive impact reading has had on children dealing with the process. There is comfort in reading for children and books can help them to understand they are not alone, it’s not that fault and that change can be for the better.

Here are my top 12 books, that I have used when working with clients and their children.  I have organised by age range.

Older children (recommended 9+)

The Suitcase Kid by Jacqueline Wilson

When my parents split up they didn’t know what to do with me . . . My family always lived at Mulberry Cottage. Mum, Dad, me – and Radish, my Sylvanian rabbit. But now Mum lives with Bill the Baboon and his three kids. Dad lives with Carrie and her twins. And where do I live? I live out of a suitcase. One week with Mum’s new family, one week with Dad’s.

Deals with: having two homes, blended families

Clean Break by Jacqueline Wilson

Em adores her funny, glamorous dad – who cares if he’s not her real father? He’s wonderful to her, and to her little brother Maxie and sister Vita. True to form at Christmas, Dad gives them fantastic presents, including a real emerald ring for his little Princess Em.

Unfortunately, he’s got another surprise in store – he’s leaving them. Will Dad’s well-meaning but chaotic attempts to keep seeing Em and the other children help the family come to terms with this new crisis? Or would they be better off with a clean break – just like Em’s arm?

Deals with: rejection, absence, step-parents

Goggle Eyes by Anne Fine

Kitty Killin is not only a good storyteller but also the World’s Greatest Expert when it comes to mothers having new and unwanted boyfriends. Particularly when there’s a danger they might turn into new and unwanted stepfathers…

Deals with: new partners, step-parents

It’s not the end of the world by Judy Blume

Karen’s parents have always argued, and lately, they’ve been getting worse. But when her father announces that they’re going to get divorced, it seems as if Karen’s whole world will fall apart. Her brother, Jeff, blames their mum. Her kid sister, Amy, asks impossible questions and is scared that everyone she loves is going to leave. Karen just wants her parents to get back together. Gradually, she learns that this isn’t going to happen – and realizes that divorce is not the end of the world.

Deals with: family conflict and separation

Younger children (recommended 3-8 yrs)

Mum and Dad Glue by Kes Gray

A little boy tries to find a pot of parent glue to stick his mum and dad back together. His parents have come undone and he wants to mend their marriage, stick their smiles back on and make them better. This rhyming story is brilliantly told with a powerful message that even though his parents may be broken, their love for him is not.

Deals with: coming to terms with parents’ separation

The Family Fairies by Rosemary Lucas

Rosemary’s primary aim was to provide the foundations for other adoptive families to help explain their own remarkable journeys… storytelling to help children understand that families come together in different ways.

Deals with: the adoption process

Two Homes by Claire Masurel

In this award-winning picture book classic about divorce, Alex has two homes – a home where Daddy lives and a home where Mummy lives. Alex has two front doors, two bedrooms and two very different favourite chairs. He has a toothbrush at Mummy’s and a toothbrush at Daddy’s. But whether Alex is with Mummy or Daddy, one thing stays the same: Alex is loved by them both – always. This gently reassuring story focuses on what is gained rather than what is lost when parents divorce, while the sensitive illustrations, depicting two unique homes in all their small details, firmly establish Alex’s place in both of them. Two Homes will help children – and parents – embrace even the most difficult of changes with an open and optimistic heart.

Deals with: parents’ separation, moving between two homes

The Great Big Book of Families by Mary Hoffman

What is a family? Once, it was said to be a father, mother, boy, girl, cat and dog living in a house with a garden. But as times have changed, families have changed too, and now there are almost as many kinds of families as colours of the rainbow – from a mum and dad or single parent to two mums or two dads, from a mixed-race family to children with different mums and dads, to families with a disabled member. This is a fresh, optimistic look through children’s eyes at today’s wide variety of family life: from homes, food, ways of celebrating, schools and holidays to getting around, jobs and housework, from extended families, languages and hobbies to pets and family trees.

Deals with: change in family dynamics, non-traditional families

Very young children (2+)

I’ll never let you go by Smriti Prasadam-Halls

When you aren’t sure, you’ll feel me near,
When you are scared, I will be here.
When you are high, when you are low,
I’ll be holding your hand and I’ll never let go.

A tender and heartfelt picture book. With reassuring words offering a message of unconditional love, and illustrations bursting with exuberance, warmth and humour.

Deals with: reassurance

Living with mum and living with dad: my two homes

Mum and Dad don’t live together any more, so sometimes this little girl lives with her mum and her cat, and sometimes she lives with her dad. She has two bedrooms and two sets of toys, but she takes her favourite toys with her wherever she goes. This simple, warm, lift-the-flap book with bold and colourful illustrations is a reassuring representation of separation for the youngest children. Melanie Walsh is sympathetically alive to the changes in routine that are familiar to many children who live with separate parents and are loved by both.

Deals with: moving between homes, changes to routine

The Family Book by Todd Parr

Some families have two moms or two dads. Some families have one parent instead of two. Some families live in a house by themselves. Some families share a house with other families. All families can help each other be strong!

The Family Book celebrates families and all the different varieties they come in. Whether they’re big or small, look alike or different, have a single parent or two, Todd Parr assures readers that every family is special in its own unique way.

Deals with: looking at different kinds of families

Guess how much I love you by Sam McBratney

Sometimes, when you love someone very, very much, you want to find a way of describing how much you treasure them. But, as Little Nutbrown Hare and Big Nutbrown Hare discover, love is not always an easy thing to measure. The story of Little and Big Nutbrown Hares’ efforts to express their love for each other.

Deals with: comfort

Get in touch

If you need support and advice on getting a divorce, please do get in touch with our Client Care Team at the details below or make an online enquiry

The post 12 of the best books to help children cope with divorce appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: Helen Miller

Posted on

The sins of social media

In any type of litigation the parties may obviously be aggrieved by a decision of the court that goes against them. However, in family litigation the sense of injustice can go much deeper, especially where children are involved. It can reach such a point that the aggrieved party may seek redress outside of the court, which they see as biased against them.

This is nothing new. Aggrieved litigants have always gone to the media to try to gain support for their case. However, more often than not of course the media are not interested, or not prepared to get involved. What has changed in recent times is that other avenues of redress have opened up for the aggrieved litigant.

I am talking, of course, about social media, whether Twitter, Facebook, blogging, YouTube or some other form. Social media has given the aggrieved litigant a potential audience beyond anything that could previously have been imagined. And there are few limitations upon what can be said on social media. Better still, you can reach that audience with great ease, by writing a few words, or by just posting a video, all from the comfort of your own home. But that ease of use can be a problem: without the ‘filter’ of having to go to the media, litigants can often get themselves into trouble before they have had a chance to consider the implications.

Obviously, the actual audience may often initially be quite small, limited to those friends and family who follow your social media account. But it doesn’t take much knowledge to widen the audience significantly, by reaching out to others with a similar grievance. And then those others only need to click a button to spread the word to their own followers. Soon your story might be known by thousands of like-minded people.

It all seems such a wonderful idea. With a few words and a few clicks of a mouse you can gather an army of supporters, ready to tackle the injustices of the biased family courts.

But this road is fraught with dangers, and it will almost certainly not provide you with the result you seek. Instead, it is only likely to damage your case, possibly fatally.

The first and obvious point to make is that the court is likely to take an extremely dim view of a party who uses social media in an attempt to undermine the authority of the court. This could well influence future decisions made by the court.

The second point to make is that children involved in family court proceedings should usually not be identified. And that also means that it should not be possible to do a ‘jigsaw’ identification, by giving sufficient details to enable them to be identified even if they are not actually named. Courts are likely to penalise anyone identifying a child involved in family proceedings.

Note that even if you use social media anonymously and do not identify any of the parties involved, there is still a very high chance that your reader/watchers/listeners (or some of them) will be able to work out who you are. It isn’t worth the risk.

And the final point I wish to make is a non-legal one. Think of the effect upon your child of what you are doing. Do they want to be at the centre of a social media storm? Do they want the intimate details of their family life exposed to public scrutiny? And remember what you are doing may deepen the rifts within their family, leaving them with scars that may remain for the rest of their lives.

Let me be clear: unless the court has expressly forbidden you from discussing your case with anyone at all, you are not expected to keep entirely silent. It is quite normal to discuss a family case with other members of your family, or close friends. In fact, such discussions can be very useful, acting both as a relief valve and a support at an extremely stressful time in one’s life (best though to ignore any ‘legal’ advice from friends and family). But you should only of course discuss your case with people that you can trust not to discuss it with others. Being impersonal, social media doesn’t usually have that protection.

The moral of the story is very simple: the only safe course is not to mention or discuss your case on social media. Don’t be tempted to rush to your computer as soon as you get back from court: think about the implications of what you are about to do.

I realise that all of the above will have been said before, including by me. But it clearly needs to be repeated. Increasing numbers of parents are continuing to fall into the trap of taking their case to the court of social media, rather than concentrating on the only court that matters: the Family Court.

The post The sins of social media appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch

Posted on

More marriages, more mediations, and more divorces

Last week was what I call ‘statistics week’, the week when we are treated to an avalanche of the most recent available statistics for all sorts of family law related things, including on this occasion marriages, legal aid and the Family Court. So, what did this latest instalment of facts and figures add to the sum of our knowledge?

I’ll begin with the statistics for marriages. Specifically, these are for marriages in England and Wales, for the year 2016. They come from the Office for National Statistics (‘ONS’). Amongst the headline points were the following:

  • There were 249,793 marriages in England and Wales, 1.7% more than in 2015, but 1.0% fewer than in 2014.
  • 97.2% of all marriages were between opposite-sex couples and 2.8% were between same-sex couples.
  • There were 7,019 marriages between same-sex couples, an increase of 8.1% from 2015; of these marriages, 55.7% were between female couples.
  • Marriage rates for opposite-sex couples were lower at all ages compared with 2006, except for men aged 60 years and over and women aged 50 years and over.

The main point to take from this, I think, is that, as the ONS statistician comments, despite the small increase, marriage rates remain at historical lows. This can perhaps be seen most dramatically by a graph included with the statistics showing the number of marriages of opposite-sex couples in England and Wales from 1935 to 2016. Until 1972 the graph generally remained around the 400,000 figure, but since then it has generally been on a downward spiral (of course the overall figures have been ‘buoyed’ over the last two of those years by same-sex marriages). Marriage, it is clear, will never again be the ‘expectation in life’ that it once was. Whether this is a good or bad thing will, of course, depend upon your point of view (it may also be the case that more couples will in future ‘tie the knot’, when civil partnerships become available to opposite-sex couples).

Next up, the legal aid statistics, which were from the Ministry of Justice, for the quarter October to December 2018. Sadly, these days legal aid is not particularly relevant to private family law matters, so there is not a lot to say about these statistics. Probably the most important thing relates to mediation. We are told that:

“In family mediation, Mediation Information and Assessment Meetings (MIAMs) increased by 4% in the last quarter compared to the previous year and currently stand at just over a third of pre-LASPO levels. Starts increased by 6% although outcomes increased by 5%, and are now sitting at around half of pre-LASPO levels.”

In plain English, the number of mediations is up a little bit, but is still at half what it was before legal aid was abolished. So I suppose a little bit of good news there, although clearly it is going to take a long time before mediation, which was supposed to ‘replace’ legal aid, will even return to what it was before the legal aid cuts. As I have said here before, hardly a ringing endorsement for the government’s ‘flagship’ policy.

And lastly I turn to the Family Court statistics, also from the Ministry of Justice, for the quarter October to December 2018. Amongst the main points here were the following:

  • 64,331 new cases started between October and December, up 6% on October to December 2017. For the year as a whole 262,399 new cases started during 2018, up 3% compared to 2017.
  • There was an increase in the number of private law children cases started (8%) and cases disposed (3%) to 12,986 and 10,478 respectively. For the year as a whole there were 51,658 Private law cases started in 2018, up 2% compared to 2017. The number of Private law cases disposed was 41,939 in 2018, similar to the number in 2017.
  • In 2018, it took on average 26 weeks for Private law cases to reach a final order, i.e. case closure, up three weeks compared to 2017.
  • There were 118,141 divorce petitions made during 2018, up 8% on 2017 – more in line with the number of petitions seen annually prior to the low number in 2017.

So in short, more cases, taking longer. Not very good news, either for the users of the Family Courts, or for those who work in them.

You can find the marriage statistics here, the legal aid statistics here, and the Family Court statistics here.

The post More marriages, more mediations, and more divorces appeared first on Stowe Family Law.


Go to Source
Author: John Bolch