Grimes, X Æ A-Xii and not identifying as ‘mum’ – do right and wrong parenting styles exist?

Posted on 16th February 202316th February 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Grimes, X Æ A-Xii and not identifying as ‘mum’ – Do right and wrong parenting styles exist?

The futuristic pop star, Grimes, and her equally eccentric, billionaire boyfriend, Elon Musk, are one of the most famous pairings in the world for many reasons. One of which, is their unique parenting style. Here, Nikki Bradley looks at how Grimes and Musk coparent their children and discusses why it’s okay to break the parenting ‘norms’.

She has been described as the visionary inventor of “space opera” and he as a genius supervillain. We don’t quite understand them or the nature of their relationship and despite reports they are no longer together, Grimes herself has described their relationship status in the past as “very fluid”. Our curiosity for the pair only grew when their first child together, X Æ A-Xii, was born in May 2020. The pair have since welcomed their second child, Exa Dark Sideræl Musk, born in January 2022.

A quick google of “Grimes and Elon Musk” shows the top results that follow are “baby name”, “baby”, “kids”. The otherworldly names of their children and the manner of their parenting is striking. Their children are being raised differently and the world wants to know more.

“Maybe he can sense my distaste for the word ‘mother’… I can’t identify with it”

Grimes has spoken openly about motherhood and parenting, including her decision to live apart from Elon Musk despite being romantically attached and raising two children together. Although their non-conventional parenting style does not come as surprising, one of the most shocking revelations came when Grimes revealed to Vogue that her son calls her by her real name, Claire.

She went on to explain that whilst she respects the title “mum”, it is not a term she identifies with, and she believes her son can sense her distaste for it.

“I love playing devil’s advocate, questioning my beliefs, making hard pivots”

By her own above admission, Grimes thrives off being an unconventional boundary pusher. However, when it comes to parenting and children, quirky attitudes and behaviours scare people. We may regard the age we live in as progressive, but society’s view of parenting remains incredibly conservative.

Grimes is right to challenge this.

The world thinks she and Elon Musk are weird because their style and approach to co-parenting does not fit society’s definition of “normal”.

There is no “normal” when it comes to parenting, nor is there a “perfect” way to raise your child. Children need love, protection and nurturing and a happy child will be raised in a household that keeps them safe and emotionally secure.

First time parents in particular often feel an overwhelming pressure to do things “right”. You are doing it “right” as long as you are meeting your child’s needs and acting in their best interests. The road you take to achieve that is up to you entirely.

Breaking the mould

Being a parent is not about trying to make the rest of the world happy or doing what other people tell you is correct. Being a parent is about doing right by your child and nobody else but you knows how best to do this. If you try and fit another person’s parenting mould it will feel uncomfortable, and your child will sense it. You do not want to end up a square peg in a round hole.

Do not be afraid to choose your own parenting path. Even if you are in a committed relationship with your co-parent, it may be that the “apartners” approach (committed romantically but living apart) as favoured by Grimes, is right for you and your children. It may not be a conventional but if you and your children are happy, nothing else matters.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce or family law, please get in touch with our team at McAlister Family Law.

How to cope with long-distance parenting

Posted on 2nd February 2023 by McAlister Family Law

How to cope with long-distance parenting

In an increasingly mobile world following the Covid-19 pandemic, where more of us than ever are moving out of cities as we work from home or in a hybrid fashion, how does this impact parents who live a significant distance away from the other parent? Here, Michael Compston looks at how long-distance parenting can work though direct and indirect contact, and how the school holidays can be your friend.

During the Covid-19 pandemic, nearly half[1] of all adults were working from home at least some of the time, and 8 out of 10 adults indicate that they want to work from home in a hybrid manner moving forward.

This has led to an exodus of city dwellers as families look for more space and greener living, now that they are not as constrained by the 9-5 office job that they once were.

This will likely lead to an increase in children being relocated and, ultimately, more instances where there is a significant distance between both parents. Children can only attend one school, so how can parents agree arrangements that work for the child/ren?

The reality is that, whilst both parents will have involvement in the child’s life, the child will have one ‘home’ such that the child lives with one parent and spends time with another.

Perhaps even more so than under other circumstances, communication between the parents is vital. The parent with whom the child lives must ensure that the child’s relationship with the other parent is protected and given the chance to develop even with the distances between the parents. There are several ways that this can be done:

Direct contact

Whatever the distance, we will all travel for our children. If you find yourself in a situation where you’re the parent that lives a significant distance away from your child, any time you get with your child will be precious. It will not be suitable, for example, to return the child to school on Monday given the distances involved. Instead, think about maximising your time with the child; if you can work flexibly on a Friday to arrive at school for collection, that means nearly a full weekend can be enjoyed by all.

Whilst the child lives in only one home, it is important that they understand their other parent has a home of their own. Contact should be encouraged to take place at the address of the parent with whom the child does not live, where possible.

This might not be possible during term-time if the parties live a very long way from each other, such that the journey time is greater than 6 hours.

Indirect contact

Modern technology allows us to keep up to date like our parents could not have dreamed of 30 years ago. Instant communication is possible through FaceTime and WhatsApp video calls, which is crucial to maintaining relationships over long distances.

These calls should be private; if you are the parent with whom the child lives, it is important to respect the relationship between the child and the other parent and to not intrude unnecessarily unless you have concerns about the content of the calls.

Regular video calls can be a useful tool in maintaining relationships over long distances.

School Holidays

The school holidays afford a prime opportunity for the parent with whom the child does not live to have some real, quality time with that parent. The holidays can be shared equally or perhaps even in favour of the non-resident parent to account for the disparity in contact during term-time.

Religious festivals can also be shared. Schools close for two weeks at Christmas and Easter generally, and also have provisions in place for other religious festivals such as Eid and Yom Kippur.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce or family law, please get in touch with our team at McAlister Family Law.

[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/ishybridworkingheretostay/2022-05-23

Maya Jama receives legal letter demanding £800,000 ring back

Posted on 26th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Maya Jama receives legal letter demanding £800,000 ring back

Maya Jama receives legal letter demanding the return of £800,000 engagement ring to ex-fiancé Ben Simmons. Here, Lisa Brown looks at what happens to the ring if an engagement is called off.

The new Love Island host and basketball player ended their relationship last summer after Ben’s proposal to Maya over the Christmas period. This week, Maya reportedly received a letter demanding the return of Ben’s engagement ring, but if one half of an engaged couple calls off the wedding, what happens to the engagement ring?

Not every engagement leads to a wedding, and even for those who do get married, there may be a divorce down the line. As divorce lawyers, it’s not unusual for the soon-to-be-ex-couple to argue about who keeps the engagement ring, particularly if the ring was expensive.

One half of the couple will put forward the argument that they bought it, so they own it. The other half of the couple, naturally, will advance the argument that the ring was given to them as a gift, so they can claim rightful ownership.

What does the law say about engagement rings?

The Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970 states:

“The gift of an engagement ring shall be presumed to be an absolute gift; this presumption may be rebutted by proving that the ring was given on the condition, express or implied, that it should be returned if the marriage did not take place for any reason.”

This means that unless there was an agreement to return the engagement ring if the wedding was cancelled, then the recipient is under no obligation to return the ring.

What if the engagement ring is a family heirloom?

If the engagement ring is a family heirloom, perhaps passed down through the family for many generations – and the recipient was made aware of this at the time – then it may be easier to succeed in an argument that the ring should be returned if the wedding is called off. However, no matter how sentimental the ring may be, if there has been no agreement made that the ring must be returned to the proposer, the Act still stands.

How do you ensure that you keep the ring if things don’t work out?

Many couples now enter into a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement. If the parties feel really strongly about it, provision for the fate of the engagement ring can be included in the agreement as a specific term should the couple divorce. Otherwise, the same general rule applies: the engagement ring is an absolute gift (and therefore not returnable) unless there was a condition made about the ring being returned when it was given.

So, if you are planning to ask your loved one to marry you this Valentine’s Day, maybe consider the future of the ring. We know that thoughts of break-ups and divorces should be the last thing on your mind, but if the ring has a lot of sentimental value, it might be worth protecting it in some way.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce or family law, please get in touch with our team at McAlister Family Law.

School admissions season – what happens if we disagree?

Posted on 19th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

School admissions season – What happens if we disagree?

January is never an easy month. It is one of the few times in the year where two 31-day months follow one after the other, spring feels like a lifetime away and pay day even further. On top of that, it’s school administration season. Here, Michael Compston looks at what happens if parents cannot agree on a school and how the choice can be made both inside and outside the court.

The local authority deadlines vary from authority to authority, but generally primary school deadlines are in place for the middle of January. Miss that deadline and your child runs the risk of not being accepted into their first-choice school and the application being considered as a late application.

Secondary school applications tend to run on a slightly different timetable, with deadlines being earlier in the academic year. However, we find that secondary school applications follow a more structured process as children/parents tend to be guided through this by the primary school during the child’s final year.

Children getting ready for primary school do not always have that information or guidance readily available, so this blog aims to consider how to resolve any issues arising out of primary school admissions.

Most if not all Local Authorities now process these applications online. The process is fairly straightforward; you go to the prospective schools, decide which ones you like or do not like, then select those schools in preferential order.

But what happens if you and the child’s other parent disagree? If you both have parental responsibility for a child, then it is incumbent on you both to come to a decision together. One of you may favour the school with strong academics or greater extra-curricular provision, whereas the other favours the school with more green space or a better pupil to teacher ratio. If you cannot agree on the preference order, how do you resolve matters?

Outside of court

The first solution is a simple one. Talk to each other. It might sound simple but actually discussing your preferences and why you think one school is better than the other can open up topics for discussion that you might not have considered.

If you are not able to reach a decision by discussing the matter between yourselves, then another option is to attend mediation. Mediators are trained to facilitate discussion between parents across a broad range of matters, not just limited to discussions around child contact. They can offer a neutral perspective and encourage back and forth discussion between the two of you.

Court proceedings

Should mediation not work, then the last recourse is to ask the court to make a decision by making a Specific Issue Order to decide that specific point. Alternatively, if the other parent is refusing to allow you access to the application and is preparing to submit the application themselves, it could be an application for a Prohibited Steps Order to prevent them submitting the application. Either way, both applications would be considering the same thing – what is in the best interests of the child.

This can be a costly exercise and a time-consuming exercise too. You are essentially asking the court to make a decision that, ultimately, is about what is best for the child. The court has not met your child, the court does not have the knowledge of the schools that the parents have, so you must think carefully before asking the court to intervene and make a decision that will have a long-lasting effect on your child’s education; if the child remains in their school, they will be in primary for seven years or secondary for five, so it is an important decision.

If you do end up in court proceedings, the court must consider what is in the child’s best interests. The court would almost certainly say initially that this is a decision that the parents should come to themselves; after all, the parents know the child better than the court. You would most likely both need to prepare witness statements on why you consider that your order of schools is the most suitable and then be prepared to argue your case in front of a judge.

Whilst this is very much a last resort, it is important to remember that this is the last recourse for the court. If you cannot agree, the court will likely want order you both to give evidence. It is far, far better if you can resolve matters between yourselves, with or without the help of a mediator, rather than reverting to the court process.

One Final Thought

Throughout all of these avenues for resolving any dispute on school choices, it is important to remember that the ultimate decision on where a child goes to school is down to the Local Authority in terms of state schools. The order of preferences is still important, as it will help to inform the decision of the Local Authority, but the decision is ultimately one for them.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce or family law, please get in touch with our team at McAlister Family Law.

Noel Gallagher and Sara MacDonald to divorce after 22 years – Does the length of marriage matter?

Posted on 16th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Noel Gallagher and Sara MacDonald to divorce after 22 years – Does the length of marriage matter?

Noel Gallagher, Manchester born former Oasis member, and his wife, Sara MacDonald have announced that they are to divorce following a marriage of 22 years. Here Weronika Husejko looks at how the length of a marriage can impact divorce proceedings.

The former couple married in 2011, having begun their relationship in 2001. They have two children together, Donovan, aged 15 and Sonny aged 12, both of whom are still dependent.

It is a commonly queried whether the length of a marriage has any relevance within a divorce financial settlement. The short answer to this question would be yes.

When a Judge considers a financial settlement, they must consider section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973. Section 25, amongst other things, specifies that a Judge must in particular have regard to the duration of the couples’ marriage.

What does this mean in practice?

Generally speaking, a marriage usually falls into one of three brackets, that being either a short term, medium term or long term marriage.

A short term marriage would usually be considered to be one of up to 5 years. It should be noted however that a couple cannot divorce until they have been married for a minimum of 1 year. It is more likely that the financial settlement in a short term marriage will take into consideration pre acquired assets. A “clean break” may be considered to be more appropriate in these circumstances. However, this may not always be the case, especially if there are dependent children involved, in which case the focus would be on ensuring that the children’s needs are met.

A medium term marriage would generally be viewed as around 10 years.

Noel and Sara’s marriage would most likely be considered to be a long marriage on the basis that they began living together around 2001, their marriage being a total of 22 years. This is because a period of cohabitation that moves seamlessly into marriage will also be taken into account by the Courts, when considering the length of the marriage.

A longer marriage of this nature can often be more complex when it comes to the financial settlement. The Courts may take a different approach when dividing matrimonial assets in this type of case, compared to that of a short or medium term marriage. By way of example, it is far less likely for the Court to consider Noel and Sara’s respective contributions to the marriage. As a result, it may be that there will be an equal division of assets, unless it is necessary to move away from a 50-50 split to meet the need of one of the spouses.

It may be that Noel and Sara have a pre nuptial agreement, in which case this may be taken into consideration by the Courts, and therefore may have an impact upon the overall financial settlement.

In any event, the Court’s primary interest in their case will be in ensuring that the needs of both Donovan and Sonny are met.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning divorce issues, please get in touch with our private child team at McAlister Family Law.

We cannot agree on counselling for our child – What will the court decide?

Posted on 12th January 202312th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

We cannot agree on counselling for our child – What will the court decide?

According to statistics, nearly one in 10 children and young people are affected by a mental health problem. The good news is that there is now more awareness of this issue and a number of resources available to children and young people who may be suffering. Here, Melissa Jones looks at what the court can decide if parents cannot agree on counselling for their child?

Understandably, separation and divorce can be a difficult and anxious time for children. They might feel confused and believe they need to “pick sides”. They might also believe that the separation of their parents is “their fault” and might be feeling guilty.

Where does this leave you?

Decisions on a child attending counselling would fall under the umbrella of medical decisions. If you both agree, then great, they would attend counselling. If only one parent agrees, this does not necessarily mean that the counselling should go ahead and with such important decisions is not advisable to act unilaterally. This issue should be agreed upon by all of those with parental responsibility for the child(ren).

What is Parental Responsibility?

Under section 3 (1) of the Children Act 1989 “parental responsibility” means all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his property.

What application do I need to make?

In the absence consent from all those who hold parental responsibility, a parent may wish to apply to the court for a Specific Issue Order, for the court’s permission to enable them to make decisions about the child in the absence of the other parent’s consent.

The application that would need to be made comes under Section 8 of the Children Act 1989 and is for a specific issue application; to specifically address what is the best interests of the children’s education and medical matters. Within the proceedings evidence shall be put forward by both parents to set out how their proposal is in the children’s best interests.

However, prior to making an application, the court would encourage the parties to engage in Alternative Dispute Resolution, to see if matters can be resolved. It may be that if you have spoken to a medical professional or a GP who highly recommends that the child or children attend counselling then you may be better assisted in your discussions with the other parent or in any application to the court.

Most importantly it would be best to understand why the other parent objects to the child(ren) attending counselling. Perhaps they need more information first or would like to speak to the counsellor themselves either on their own or jointly with you.

What will the court decide?

If matters relating to a child’s medical care are put before the Court, the matter then becomes a question of what is best for the child and not what is best for the parents. The Court’s primary consideration will be the needs of the child and will have regard to the Welfare Checklist (s.1 (3) CA 1989) when reaching their decisions. Arguably attending Counselling for the child might be in the child’s best interest and a vital resource to help them deal with their mental health issues. Conversely, it might not be necessary for the child to attend counselling and it may be considered intrusive and invasive given their age, characteristics and understanding. It is of course a balancing act.

Can I not just take them to counselling anyway?

However, if one parent has taken matters in their own hands and begins the process of making medical decisions without the other parents’ consent, that would not be perceived well by the court. In fact, if you choose to ignore the other parent’s views or objections, then they in turn could make an application to the family court to prevent you from making the child(ren) available for counselling. This also comes under Section 8 of the Children Act 1989 and would be for a prohibited steps order; to prohibit the child(ren) from attending counselling.

In all cases and at all times parents are strongly encouraged not just to communicate their wishes, but to co parent effectively for the best interests of their children.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning children issues, please get in touch with our private child team at McAlister Family Law.

Resource: https://www.counselling-directory.org.uk/young-people-stats.html#riskfactors

How will I get a fair divorce settlement if my ex hides their assets?

Posted on 5th January 20235th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

How will I get a fair divorce settlement if my ex hides their assets?

A common worry that those divorcing have is that their ex will hide assets to prevent them receiving a fair divorce settlement. Thankfully most people who get divorced are honest about their financial circumstances, but what if they are not? Here, Partner Fiona Wood discusses what you can do to if you suspect your spouse is hiding assets throughout financial settlements.

Before a financial settlement is negotiated it is usual for both spouses to give full financial disclosure, confirming all their assets, company interests, pensions, incomes and liabilities. Documentation needs to be provided to support what they state their financial circumstances are, including bank statements for all accounts for at least the last 12 months. If assets have not been disclosed it is often possible to prove this from the documents that have been provided, such as regular transfers from one bank account to another account that has not been disclosed.

Sometimes people give assets to friends or family, shortly before they divorce, in an attempt to exclude them from the divorce settlement. If an asset has been transferred to another person at an undervalue within a period of three years before the divorce, the onus is on the person who did this to prove that it was a legitimate transfer that was not done to reduce their ex’s financial claims. If they cannot prove this, a judge can overturn the transfer, or they can add the amount that has been lost back into the matrimonial pot.

If you are genuinely concerned that your ex is about to give away an asset or transfer it out of the country, you can apply to court for a freezing order. You need good evidence that this is about to happen, to successfully obtain a freezing order, but it is an order that can be made in court proceedings.

Sometimes one spouse has complicated finances, often of an international nature, and their ex is concerned that they will not provide a true picture of their assets. In this scenario you can do some research yourself, looking at Companies House and at the Land Registry in the UK, both of which are accessible to the public, and their equivalents in some other countries. I had a case where one spouse failed to disclose a property that he purchased in Florida, but as there is a public land registry in Florida, we were able to show that they owned this property.

There are also professionals who specialise in assets tracing, on an international scale, who use all legal means available to track down assets owned in the UK and across the world. Even if they cannot locate specific assets, they may be able to provide enough information to enable you to convince a judge that there are hidden assets and that this should be taken into account within the divorce settlement.

If you are concerned about your ex hiding assets to reduce your financial claims on divorce, there are several ways in which you can investigate this and there are legal remedies available to you if it transpires that they have done this or they are about to do this.

Understandably Judges are very unimpressed by those who do try to hide assets. There are likely to be cost orders made against them. Also, as Judges have a broad discretion when it comes to deciding what a fair financial settlement is, so the judge may order that they receive a less generous settlement than they would have received if they had not tried to hide assets.

If you have already obtained a financial settlement, but it comes to light that your ex failed to disclose some of their assets whilst you were negotiating that settlement, the financial settlement can be reopened. There are significant consequences for those who try to hide assets. Don’t do it!

If you are affected by any of the issues raised here, please get in touch today. We are here to help.

Emotional affairs, is it cheating?

Posted on 22nd December 2022 by McAlister Family Law

Emotional affairs, is it cheating?

Emotional affairs, some people don’t count it as cheating and others do. With no physical relationship in an emotional affair, how do family lawyers view it and is it grounds for a divorce? Here, Frances Bentley explores emotional affairs, questions if they should be classed as cheating, and explains whether it is grounds for a divorce.

There has been a lot of focus recently on emotional affairs and what they mean. Some people believe it doesn’t count as cheating because there is no physical relationship with somebody else. Some people think it is worse because that person is becoming emotionally reliant on somebody else, rather than their own partner or spouse.

An emotional affair is bond between two people which mimics or matches the closeness of a romantic relationship but isn’t physical. There has been a survey completed In the USA which concluded that 35% of women and 45% of men had admitted having an emotional affair before.

So why do emotional affairs happen in the first place?

It does raise a question as to whether there is a wider problem within the marriage. There could have been a breakdown in communication, it could be the result of not spending enough time together, or there could be a general lack of happiness within a marriage. Recent reports have looked at emotional affairs and asked some people to comment on their experiences and the impact. Here is what they said:

“It’s now been 6 months and I love him”

“My emotional affair is coming to an end after 2 years. I am feeling sad and pensive”

“I miss my emotional affair now that it’s gone…I feel so alone”.

It is clear that an emotional affair can put incredible strains on a marriage, and even lead to marriage breakdown leading to divorce.

What about Divorce and the Law?

Before the divorce law changed in April 2022, as family lawyers we saw clients who thought that their partner having an emotional affair constituted “adultery”. To them, their spouse having an emotional relationship with someone else had caused their marriage to break down. However, under the old law an affair could only count as adultery if there had been a sexual relationship and if that sexual relationship was with a person of the opposite sex.

This was sometimes a devastating discovery for both individuals whose partner had an emotional affair or had engaged in a same sex sexual relationship. The law came under fire for being completely outdated (and rightly so). We had to advise our clients that rather than the affair being labelled as adultery, they would have to rely on it being “unreasonable behaviour”. Understandably, to them didn’t feel like it carried the same recognition of the affair that had caused the marriage to break down. Adultery and unreasonable behaviour petitions were plagued with issues; more often than not it would result in the other party refusing to accept or admit the behaviour, toing and froing on the wording of divorce petitions, animosity and a feeling of complete lack of control over the process for person applying.

In April 2022 the old divorce law was completely abolished, with the “facts” needing to be relied on (such as adultery and unreasonable behaviour) being removed.

A person applying for a divorce now needs to simply confirm within the divorce application that the marriage has “irretrievably broken down”. There is no need to worry about the other person refusing to accept the behaviour happened or refusing to admit it (which often left a person bringing the divorce having no recognition of why the marriage had broken down).

Although the new divorce application doesn’t require an explanation of what caused the marriage breakdown, the law being simplified now means that individuals who have been on the other side of any affair (whether that be an emotional affair or a physical affair) can relatively simply make a divorce application and confirm there has been “irretrievable breakdown” as a result of the affair. It now allows them an element of control over the divorce process which for many, was much needed.

If you are affected by any of the issues raised here, please get in touch today. We are here to help.

What will I stand to get out of the matrimonial assets?

Posted on 15th December 2022 by McAlister Family Law

What will I stand to get out of the matrimonial assets?

With the United Kingdom on the cusp of a cost-of-living crisis and inflation at record highs, divorcing couples will likely face concerns now more than ever as to how finances are to be treated upon divorce. The biggest question on the minds of divorcing couples is often, ‘what will I stand to get out of the matrimonial assets?’ Here, Aaron Williams looks at what the court considers when looking at how to divide assets on divorce and how they aim to meet the ‘needs’ of each party involved.

So, what does the Court consider when looking at how to divide assets on divorce?

As with many things, there is no one size fits all answer to separating matrimonial assets. The principal aim of the court is to ensure that there is ‘fairness’. Unfortunately, fairness has a broad horizon in the context of family law, and it is largely left to the discretion of the judge as to the outcome of the matter.

The court has a duty to consider all circumstances of a case, this is done so using the principal piece of legislation in divorce; that of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, in particular the factors listed in section 25(2)(a) – (h) which can be found here: – https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1973/18/section/25

The phrase ‘needs trumps all’ is often cited when assets are limited assets in matrimonial finance cases. The starting point in any matrimonial finance case is to consider an equal division of what has been built up by the parties during the marriage; however, an equal division of assets is not always appropriate in every case to achieve fairness.

So where does that leave separating couples? Well matters largely come down to the circumstances of the parties, the standard of living and the resources available to meet needs. What was enough to meet the needs of one household may not necessarily be enough to meet two.

When settling the matrimonial assets, there is no discrimination between separating couples regarding their respective roles in the relationship. For example, where one party has typically taken the breadwinner role, whilst the other party is the home maker, their roles are to be regarded as equal irrespective of what they have contributed financially.

So, how does the court implement section 25 of the matrimonial causes act?

When assessing how to separate who should have what proportion of the assets of the marriage, the first consideration of the court is that of the needs of any children.

The court then look to meeting the needs of both parties, principally looking to ensure that each person’s housing needs, and income needs are met.

Looking at the matter holistically the court will principally consider the financial needs, obligations, and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage have or is likely to have in the foreseeable future (s.25(2)(b) MCA 1973). The court will look at the general resources of the parties and will broadly separate the needs of parties into capital needs and income needs. Capital needs, is often that of significant single capital outlays, purchasing a property, furnishings, replacement car etc. Income needs is that of the day-to-day costs that parties require on a monthly basis to live.

When trying to determine whether the parties have the means to meet these needs, the court will consider Income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future. Commonly referred to as the financial disclosure process, the parties are expected to provide ‘full and frank’ financial disclosure. This includes determining through the assistance of expert evidence or agreeing by consent, the value of any assets owned by the parties, including property, businesses, trust assets, chattels, and pensions. The court will also need to ascertain the parties’ respective incomes, whether they have to capacity to increase their income, receive a bonus etc. The process ultimately aims to ensure that no stone is left unturned.

With all this in consideration the court has a great deal of flexibility to in their approach to financial settlement, which in turn allows the court to ensure (as far as possible) that an outcome reached is fair to both parties, and that neither party nor dependent children are left in need. However, this level of flexibility also carries its own disadvantages as it can be difficult for parties to envisage how a judge may determine the respective parties’ needs.

If you are affected by any of the issues raised here, please get in touch today. We are here to help.

Kanye to pay $200,000 / month in child maintenance. What lessons can be learned from the settlements of the ultra-rich?

Posted on 2nd December 20222nd December 2022 by McAlister Family Law

Kanye to pay $200,000 / month in child maintenance. What lessons can be learned from the settlements of the ultra-rich?

In the long line of staggering elements of Kanye West’s most tumultuous year, him agreeing to pay a $200,000 (around £165,000) a month settlement to his ex-wife, Kim Kardashian, for child support, is not even the most surprising or jaw-dropping. Here, Michael Compston discusses how this figure was decided upon and what lessons can be learned from the settlements of the ultra-ultra-rich for the remainder of society.

Before we begin, let’s look at some background. West, or Ye as he now likes to be known, is 45 and Kardashian is 42. They married in 2014 and divorced in 2022, being married for some 8 years. The couple happily had four children together, North (9), Saint (6), Chicago (4) and Psalm (2).

For starters, West and Kardashian have agreed to there being no spousal maintenance being paid to either. This, given their extraordinary wealth – both being estimated as being worth at least $1billion individually in the last twelve months, though West’s current status may be “just” that of a 9-figure millionaire – is perhaps not surprising. What they have agreed is for West to pay the sum of $200,000 a month to Kardashian for child support.

The concept of child support, or child maintenance in England & Wales, is one whereby one parent pays a monthly sum to the other parent to ‘support’ or ‘maintain’ the children. The use of the word ‘maintain’ is perhaps more helpful in understanding what the concept of child support actually is. The children must be maintained in the lifestyle that they have become accustomed to. It is most commonly paid by the parent with whom the children spend less time, though in the West v Kardashian case the arrangements in the US case for the children are seemingly shared. The mechanism by which a court would consider maintenance is paid is found under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, though most separating couples will use the maintenance calculator on the Child Maintenance Service website.

In some cases where the ultra-ultra-rich are not concerned, this might extend to items such as ballet lessons, horse riding, art workshops etc. If the couple used to holiday abroad twice a year, then the children should still be able to do so upon divorce, if it can be afforded. Divorce should not be a reason why a child is not able to continue to take part in the activities that they enjoyed when the family lived together all under one roof.

In cases of the West children, the activities are slightly more extravagant. They will not be staying at chain hotels but staying at the most luxurious accommodation worldwide. It is not uncommon for either parent to fly by private jet; those tickets do not come cheap even for the uber-wealthy. The elder children have become accustomed to that lifestyle and would not be expected to have to go without, irrespective of how detached from the norm we may consider that to be. As a family very much in the “A-List”, there are security costs to ensure their safety. All of this has a cost, even to the billionaires.

Schooling is often a big factor. As part of financial settlements upon divorce in England and Wales, the court can make specific school fees orders that ensure a child is kept in the level of education to which they have become accustomed. The West children all attend a fee-paying school and if this was being dealt with in England and Wales it would not be expected to stop attending that school, or a school of similar standing especially as they progress from elementary (primary) to high (secondary) school, because of their parent’s divorce. It is understood that the couple have agreed to share the school fees, which will have been factored into the $200,000 a month payment; not only this, but college funds will need to have been carefully considered for all four.

West and Kardashian have, perhaps sensibly, avoided the need for a trial by reaching a settlement. This is behaviour that would be encouraged regardless of the parties’ wealth and behaviour that we would encourage in those individuals struggling to reach an agreement. By avoiding the trial, they have avoided the considerable expense and emotional difficulty of having their finances and activities laid bare in front a judge, before a decision is made without necessarily having their agreement.

The same principle applies in the ‘real world’, In England and Wales if you attend a final hearing on finances, you are handing over the power to make decisions to a Judge. Negotiations beforehand may result in an outcome that, whilst not ticking every box, might just be a better settlement for both, rather than risk a Judge falling closer to the opponent’s side of the spectrum than yours.

West’s 2022 has been chaotic, to say the least. He has lost a number of endorsements as a result of anti-semitic rants and has been suspended from Twitter. Mega companies such as Adidas and Balenciaga have cut all ties with him. This will no doubt impact his finances for years to come and it may be that the $200,000 a month payment to Kardashian is unaffordable in the future. West will need to bring the matter back to court and provide sufficient evidence that his means have dwindled to the extent he cannot pay the sum agreed. The same principle operates in any settlement in England and Wales; if there is a material change in the financial circumstance of the paying party, then it is only fair that a reassessment be considered. A party cannot simply choose not to work or not be employed to an appropriate standard to try and frustrate the other parent; it is unlikely that if the case was being dealt with over here we would see West stacking shelves in a supermarket any time soon, as he would be accused of failing to maximise his earning potential.

If you are affected by any of the issues raised here, please get in touch today. We are here to help.