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.

Taking a child on holiday with a different surname

Posted on 2nd August 202224th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Taking a child abroad with a different surname

Now that the summer holidays have begun, you may be planning for a family holiday abroad. For most families in the UK with children, planning for a holiday involves taking certain precautions to ensure that they do not encounter any issues whilst travelling. This is particularly important for those parents that will be travelling with a child that has a different surname to them. Here Weronika Husejko offers her top tips for traveling abroad with a child who has a different surname.

What is the current situation?

In recent years, it has become increasingly difficult to travel abroad as a family in these circumstances. Many countries are stricter when it comes to parents travelling with children that do not have the same surname as them. Whilst this is a welcome change which promotes the safety of children all over the world, if you are not aware of this, a trip abroad can quickly become more stressful than anticipated.

How can I prepare?

There are some documents that you can bring with you which will reduce the likelihood of you and your family being held up whilst travelling.

Your child’s birth or adoption certificate. This can verify that you are in fact the child’s parent.

Proof of your change of surname such as your marriage certificate, deed poll or decree absolute which can demonstrate the reason for the difference in surname.

Written consent from the other parent. Asking the child’s other parent to sign a written form of authority demonstrating their consent to you taking then abroad can be useful as in most circumstances it is illegal to take a child abroad without the consent of every person with parental responsibility of that child.

Existing Court Order. If your child is subject to an existing Court Order such as a Child Arrangements Order, this is another document which may verify the connection to your child.

And finally…

Make sure to do some research as the rules can vary. It is always a good idea to look into the guidelines of the specific country that you are travelling to. Most airlines should also be able to provide you with some basic advice for your trip.

If you have any questions about this issue, or any other family law matter, please contact our team who would be happy to assist.

Can a child apply for financial support in their own right?

Posted on 28th July 202224th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Can a child apply for financial support in their own right?

Do the family courts have jurisdiction to grant a financial order on the application of a child against their parents? The short answer is yes, but only in limited circumstances. Here Aaron Williams explains how in one particular case, a child was able to make such an application.

In the novel case of FS v RS and JS [2020] EWFC 63, ‘children’ were able to make such an application. The circumstances in that case concerned an adult ‘child’. The applicant (aged 41) was a university graduate and qualified solicitor, however, due to his mental health hadn’t worked since 2011. The applicant was at the time of his application in further education in London. The applicant’s parents historically provided him with financial assistance by letting him reside in their London property with all outgoings paid for; these circumstances changed however when the applicant’s relationship with his parents deteriorated, and their financial assistance was reduced.

The applicant applied to the court claiming that his parents had ‘nurtured his dependency’ on them financially, and that their removal of financial aid would leave him poor and destitute. His application to the court was threefold, namely under; a) Section 27 of the Matrimonial Causes Act, b) Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989, and c) the Court’s power to protect vulnerable adults who have the mental capacity ‘to make their own decision (under its inherent jurisdiction).

The court ultimately determined that it did not have jurisdiction to make an order for financial support in the circumstances of this case; but in its determination considered the circumstances such an application could be brought by a child.

Section 27 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973

Section 27 of the Matrimonial Causes Act enables the court to make financial provisions where one spouse has been neglecting to maintain the other spouse or a ‘child’ of the family. In this circumstance a child of 16 or older may make an application to the court, but only where one of their parents has previously applied (against the other parent) for a periodical payments order in the child’s favour.

Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989

Under Schedule 1 children who are over the age of 18 can make an application against their parent, provided: –

The child is, or will be going on to higher education, undergoing training for a trade, profession or vocation; or
There are special circumstances that justify the order.

The court found against the applicant on the issue of higher education, as the judge found that ‘conventional wisdom and practice would suggest that these provisions were never intended to be used and cannot be used to fund the education of a perpetual student’.

‘Special circumstances’ are not defined and are ultimately the discretion of the court but there are several cases which provide examples of what may consider ‘special’.

T v S [1994]: a physical or cognitive disability.
C v F [1998]: where a child was severely disabled and would be dependent on another person for their whole life.

In short, the courts generally consider that a parent’s financial obligation to their child ceases at 18 years of age, and that the child will usually no longer be dependant when they finish their education. It is only in one of the limited circumstances detailed above that an adult child can make an application against their parent for financial provision.

Do I still have to pay child maintenance when my child attends university?

Posted on 21st July 202224th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Do I still have to pay child maintenance when my child attends university?

Lots of parents don’t know what level of financial contribution they are required to make (if any) when their children start university, and it’s something that isn’t talked about often. What if one parent wants to continue financial support and the other doesn’t? Here, Frances Bentley explains the requirements for separated parents to pay maintenance throughout their child’s academic career.

Child maintenance (as dealt with by the Child Maintenance Service), is payable until a child is age 16 or up to age 20 if they are in full time secondary education (college education). So, if a child finishes their A-levels/college education at age 18, the paying parent only needs to pay child maintenance until they finish, because university education does not fall under the umbrella of secondary education. So, there is no requirement to continue paying child maintenance beyond that time and when a child goes to university.

Lots of parents will decide to provide their children with a level of voluntary financial support whilst at university, but if one parents states they simply are not going to, the other parent may query whether there is a legal route for them to force contributions to their child’s ongoing educational costs.

If you are in this situation what should you do?

This is something that should be thought about by parents early on because the court’s powers are more limited once the age of 18 is reached. Before considering any potential legal route, parents should keep lines of communication open, to discuss their concerns and the level of financial contribution that might be required.

There will need to be an exercise whereby you calculate what the child’s income vs expenditure will be. For example, are they going to receive grants, loans, or have any income from employment? What will their expenses be, so accommodation costs, bills, books, living expenses? The reason this is important is so that you can calculate what level of shortfall there is and what you need the other parent to pay. This is also what the court would do if a legal route was later pursued.

If there is no progress, then mediation could be a good option to talk through the issues with the other parent – a mediator is a trained professional who will allow you both to have your say and the aim would be to reach a financial agreement that way.

If an agreement cannot be reached, is there a legal remedy that a parent can pursue, once child maintenance has ceased and if the child needs ongoing financial support?

It is possible for a parent to make a court application under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989 for periodical payments (financial support) or for a lump sum for a child. However, the court only has powers to make orders until the child is 18, and if the children is over 18, they are required to make the application themselves.

For an application to be pursued, the child must be in “full time” education, or undergoing training, or there would need to be special circumstances (for example the child involved has a disability or vulnerability which means they cannot be financially independent).

When determining a schedule 1 application, the court would look at “all of the circumstances of the case” including:

the income, earning capacity, property and other financial resources which each person has or is likely to have in the future;
the financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each person has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;
The financial needs of the child;
The income, earning capacity (if any), property and other financial resources of the child;
Any physical or mental disability of the child;
The manner in which the child was being, or was expected to be educated or trained.

It is always important to seek early advice if you are wanting to know your options about making a court application. Our specialist team of family lawyers can advise you in respect of your options, prospects of success, whether an application should be made my you or your child directly (taking into account the court’s powers and the children’s age) and undertake a costs v benefits analysis of making any court application on your behalf.

We cannot agree on a school – What will the court decide?

Posted on 15th July 202224th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

We cannot agree on a school – What will the court decide?

If you are separated parents and cannot agree on what school your children should attend there are considerations that both of you need to keep in mind. Here, Jemma Wentworth discusses what happens when a separated couple cannot decide on which school their child should attend, and how the Court’s decision may vary depending on the care arrangement.

If it is agreed between you that one parent is the primary carer, meaning that one parent deals with the day to day needs of the children, and the children’s home is with that particular parent, then common sense must prevail. The school most local to that parent, or the school being selected by that parent, should be first consideration.

If that educational setting is not agreed by the non-primary parent, justifiable reasons must be put forward setting out why another setting should be considered. This is a scenario when obtaining legal advice would be beneficial.

However, if there is a shared care arrangement in place, thereby resulting that both parents’ homes are where the children equally call their home, and if the parents cannot agree on an educational setting, obtaining legal advice is vital and an application to the family court may well be required.

Initially, other forums for alternative dispute resolution to resolve the dispute must be attempted, for example, mediation. If an agreement cannot be reached, a court application should be issued.

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. 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, if one parent has taken matters in their own hands and begins the process of changing the children’s school without the other parents’ consent, that parent would need to issue an urgent application to the family court to prevent the children’s removal from that school. This also comes under section 8 of the Children Act 1989 and would be for a prohibited steps order; to prohibit the children’s removal from the school without a court order to do so. In this case, any order of the court would need to be provided to the school as well as all those with parental responsibility.

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.

Divorce and school fees – Will the court make my spouse pay?

Posted on 6th July 202224th January 2023 by McAlister Family Law

Divorce and school fees – Will the court make my spouse pay?

One of the difficult parts of resolving financial issues in a divorce or separation is that, for most people, the lifestyle that they lead, their home and their expenditure is commensurate with the income which they have as a couple / family. Here, Lisa Brown breaks down how a financial dispute within a divorce can effect the school fees of children stuck in the middle.

When the couple split, that same income must suddenly run two homes rather than one and it is often the case that something has to give.

That might mean a change in the standard of holidays or cars or a smaller home but what happens when it is your child’s education at stake?

For some people trying to make the maths work on a separation, a private education becomes something which is perhaps no longer affordable and / or they may feel that other family expenditure should be prioritised. If both parties agree then potentially there is no issue but very often that is not the case.

Children, on the whole, are an emotional issue when parties separate and it may feel to one party that it is of the utmost importance that a child’s education and some consistency and normality be preserved.

On the other hand, fees for day schools are likely to be in the region of £15,000 per child per year. Boarding school will be more. Bearing in mind children can potentially be in education for 14 years this could mean a commitment in excess of £200,000 for each child. This is significant and very often there may be more than one child to consider.

So, what is the court’s view

At the outset I should say that the fundamental question of what school a child attends is not dealt with as part of the resolution of financial claims. The court on an application about finances can only resolve the issue of who pays. That may ultimately settle the dispute if the court declines to make an order and the person who wants the children to attend private education has no other method of paying but sometimes the objection is not just about the fees but the principle too.

If there was an issue whereby one party was saying that even if it were affordable the children would be better off in state education, then this would be an issue to be determined under the Children Act 1989 in line with the child or children’s best interests.

In circumstances where the only question is fees the court test is slightly different and although the children will always be the court’s first consideration there are a number of factors to look at known as the “section 25 factors” to consider and set out below:

(a) the 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;

(b) the financial needs, obligations and responsibilities which each of the parties to the marriage has or is likely to have in the foreseeable future;

(d) the age of each party to the marriage and the duration of the marriage;

(e) any physical or mental disability of either of the parties to the marriage;

(f) the contributions which each of the parties has made or is likely in the foreseeable future to make to the welfare of the family, including any contribution by looking after the home or caring for the family;

(g) the conduct of each of the parties, if that conduct is such that it would in the opinion of the court be inequitable to disregard it (although this is not usually considered in reality in the vast majority of cases)

The primary issue with school fees is likely to be balancing income and needs to see whether it is affordable for school fees to be paid whilst also ensuring housing and other needs can be met.

Where the court feels school fees are affordable, they will make what is know as a “school fees order” obliging one or potentially both parties to pay all or a portion of the fees. This obligation is on top of any child maintenance and any spousal maintenance payable.

Can capital be set aside to pay for fees by the court?

The short answer is no. The court has no power to force parties to ring-fence a sum to pay for school fees. Parties can and do agree to do this or to put funds into trust for that purpose and, indeed, one of the benefits of coming to an agreed settlement is that it can be more sophisticated than the court which can be a blunt instrument. Legal advice should, however, be sought when considering this type of structure.

Grandparents have always paid- can the court force them to continue?

Again, the short answer is no. The court has no power to force a third party continue to meet school fees although it is possible, they will consider the way school fees have been met historically when making any decision overall.

What will a school fees order cover?

Standard wording might often cover “reasonable invoiced extras” perhaps specifically excluding exceptional items such as trips, but it is sensible to give consideration to what the expectation is. Are buses covered, lunches, uniform and so on?

Conclusion

There is no easy answer to this question, and it very much depends on the circumstances of the case including income / assets, how many children there are and where they are in their education.

It is important to look at the bigger picture and the outcome of your case generally. For example, carving out a school fees fund might seem attractive because it secures your child’s future, but it might prejudice your position overall if it is the case that those fees should really be being paid from your spouses’ income and the monies set aside in the fund should be divided between you meaning you would receive more capital.

Before reaching any final financial settlement whether in relation to school fees or anything else you should always speak to an experienced family solicitor. If you have any questions about this issue, or any other family law matter, please contact our team who would be happy to assist.