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.

No Fault Divorce – the Good, the Bad, and the Neutral

Posted on 7th January 202218th March 2022 by McAlister Family Law

No Fault Divorce – the Good, the Bad, and the Neutral

Our managing partner, Amanda McAlister, recently appeared on BBC Morning Live discussing what the incoming no fault divorce law is and what it will mean for couples that are currently considering a divorce.

In this blog, Heather Lucy, Solicitor at McAlister Family Law, discusses the pros and cons of the new law in more depth.

People considering divorce are often surprised to hear that, in most circumstances, there will need to be an element of ‘blame’ to begin proceedings immediately. The current legislation says that a marriage will only be dissolved on its ‘irretrievable breakdown’ which must be evidenced with one of five facts

Unreasonable behaviour – assigns blame
Adultery – assigns blame
Desertion – very rare and now archaic
Two years’ separation with consent – does not assign blame but stops the divorcing couple moving forward
Five years’ separation (no consent needed) – does not assign blame but more time in limbo

Many people wanting to divorce want the change to happen as soon as possible and to get through this time of their life in as pain-free a manner as possible. Practitioners and campaigners have been calling for no-fault divorce for many years and it is set to soon become a reality. But what does it actually mean and what are the consequences?

What’s happening?

There is to be a reform to the law on the breakdown of marriages for the first time since 1973. Splitting couples will no longer need to evidence the ‘irretrievable breakdown’ of the marriage but can, instead, just give a statement to the court to say that the marriage has broken down irretrievably – there is no need to pick one of the five factors above. Couples will also be able to jointly petition for divorce for the first time.

The new law is due to come into place in April 2022 though it was initially scheduled for June 2021.

The Good

Less hostility – this helps with avoid souring relations between the divorcing couple. Often there are financial matters to sort out and children to co-parent. Splitting up is never pleasant but it can be achieved amicably and no-fault divorce is likely to help this.
Less likely to end up in court – currently, divorces can be contested and this can lead to very expensive and protracted proceedings. Fortunately, this is rare but the risk is removed with no-fault divorce except in exceptional circumstances.
More cost-effective – there will need to be less correspondence between solicitors attempting to agree a divorce petition that is palatable to both people. This will save costs.

The Bad

Some people fear that this amendment to the law will make it too easy to get divorced and it detracts from the sanctity of marriage. This is combatted by a minimum timescale of 6 months from submission to final order.
It is not clear whether the government will be ready for the law to come into effect in April 2022 so anyone waiting for the introduction of no-fault divorce cannot be certain of when they can divorce.

And the…neutral

People seeking legal advice on divorce often assume that assigning blame to one party will give them an advantage when sorting out their finances. This is very rarely the case so the introduction of no-fault divorce will not make a difference.

If you are thinking about divorce and want to discuss your options, including whether waiting for the new rules to come into force, please do not hesitate to contact us.