I’m getting a divorce – Will I get support from my employer?

I’m getting a divorce – Will I get support from my employer?

Going through a divorce is undoubtedly one of the most difficult things a person can experience. Going through a divorce whilst also working however can seem an impossible task. Here, Weronika Husejko looks at the pressure on divorcing couples and explores how employers are providing support to their divorcing employees.

Most people suffer from an extreme amount of stress when separating from their spouse, the breakdown of the marriage being a significant change to their life.  In addition to coping with the emotional side of the break-up, spouses must also deal with the practical side, to formalise the separation, which can be overwhelming.

The majority of separating spouses have financial ties, such as jointly owned property, which will need to be divided.  One of the toughest parts of a divorce is usually when  the couple must make a decision as to how these assets should be divided, particularly in cases where there are not enough to meet both spouses’ needs.

Dealing with these types of financial matters upon separation is challenging and emotionally draining, particularly for those who end up in Court proceedings, due to their time consuming and costly nature. For example, those in Court proceedings are usually required to comply with several Court directions, including attending Court hearings, which is a stressful experience in itself.

A divorce is therefore very demanding and as a result, it is not uncommon for employees experiencing a marital breakdown to feel torn between their job and their divorce, this often having a detrimental effect on their mental health. Historically speaking this has been something which most employees have unfortunately been expected to endure.

The BBC have however recently reported that some companies are beginning to introduce and build policies which are intended to help their employees in navigating a divorce.

By way of example, some companies are offering benefits such as: –

  • Paid time off to attend things such as solicitors’ meetings or mediation.
  • Flexible working arrangements
  • Access to emotional and mental health support
  • Access to legal advice

There are also organisations in the UK which are trying to promote more family-friendly policies like those mentioned above to help those going through the breakdown of a relationship. For example, the Positive Parenting Alliance have called for a separation to be recognised as a ‘life event’ by employers in HR policies and have also suggested that employees going through a separation should be offered support by way of counselling if needed.

Tesco is one of the first large companies in the UK to provide their employees with this type of support, as recommended by the Positive Parenting Alliance.

In summary, whether you get any support from your employer during your divorce will be dependent upon their specific company policy, so you may wish to consider speaking to your HR department about the options available to you.

It does seem that there is a shift happening with more companies recognising the difficulties involved in a marital breakdown. In my view, this is a positive shift which also demonstrates an increasing awareness of the importance of mental health generally, which will hopefully result in more people receiving the support they need during what is a very difficult time.

If you or someone you know is affected by the issues raised in this blog post, we can provide you with expert legal advice. For more information, please get in touch with our specialist team at hello@mcalisterfamilylaw.co.uk

Are pre-nuptial agreements only for the rich and famous?

Are pre-nuptial agreements only for the rich and famous?

As seen with the ongoing separation of Hollywood star Kevin Costner, pre-nuptial agreements are often considered something that is limited to the super-wealthy or the Hollywood Hills. McAlister Family Law Associate, Aaron Williams, aims to shed light on what prenuptial agreements entail and whether they hold legal weight in the United Kingdom.

 

Prenuptial agreements, often referred to as “prenups,” are legal documents that couples enter into before marriage or civil partnership to outline the division of assets and financial responsibilities in the event of separation or divorce. A prenuptial agreement is a legally binding contract that helps couples establish financial boundaries and protect their assets in the event of a relationship breakdown. Although these agreements are more commonly associated with high-net-worth individuals, they can benefit any couple looking to safeguard their financial interests.

 

The primary purpose of a prenup is to provide clarity and certainty regarding the division of assets, debts, and other financial matters. It allows couples to determine how their property, investments, inheritances, and business interests will be divided in the event of separation or divorce. Prenuptial agreements can also address issues such as spousal support and the allocation of debts, providing a comprehensive framework for resolving potential disputes. Prenuptial agreements are legally recognized in the United Kingdom, but their enforceability is subject to the discretion of the courts. While they are not automatically binding, they carry significant weight if certain conditions are met.

To ensure the enforceability of a prenuptial agreement, it must be entered into willingly, with both parties having received independent legal advice and provided full financial disclosure. The agreement should also be fair and reasonable at the time it is made, taking into consideration the future needs of both parties and any children involved. It is important to note that the courts retain the power to depart from the terms of a prenuptial agreement if they deem it unfair in the circumstances. Factors such as the length of the marriage, the welfare of any children, and significant changes in the parties’ financial situations may be considered when determining the enforceability of a prenup.

 

Prenuptial agreements offer couples a valuable tool for establishing financial arrangements and protecting their assets in case of a relationship breakdown. While not automatically binding in the U.K., a well-drafted and fair prenup, entered into with full disclosure and legal advice, can carry significant weight in court proceedings.

If you or someone you know is affected by the issues raised in this blog post, we can provide you with expert legal advice. For more information, please get in touch with our specialist team at hello@mcalisterfamilylaw.co.uk

Should we open a joint account?

Should we open a joint account?

There are lots of decisions to make during a relationship and perhaps even more so when parties begin cohabiting. One of the questions which sometimes comes up is whether or not you should have a joint bank account with your partner? Here, Lisa Brown looks at what a joint account means from the perspective of couples, the bank, and family law.  

This is obviously a personal decision and can vary between couples. It can be helpful from a practical point of view if you have a lot of joint expenditure, but it would be sensible to agree some ground rules about usage and how much each party is expected to contribute from the outset.

From the bank’s perspective, for example, if one party were to run up a large overdraft on a joint account, they would still generally consider that to a joint liability.  Similarly, from a family law point of view if a cohabiting couple are separating the starting point would be that assets are divided as they are held legally so any savings in a joint account should be shared equally, and any joint borrowing should be borne equally.

To have some clarity between you, it might be sensible to have a cohabitation agreement which can deal with how any assets would be divided on separation (including any joint accounts) and also, if you wish, how outgoings will be met during the relationship.

These agreements are not currently 100% binding, but they are very useful and are becoming more and more popular.

What about if you are married?

Lots of married couples have joint accounts but it is not a pre-requisite, and some choose not to.

Back in February Chloe Madeley hit the headlines when she revealed that she went back to work 8 weeks after giving birth citing the fact that she doesn’t have a joint account with her husband, James Haskell (and presumably that in effect they both financially support themselves).

Whilst obviously it is for every individual couple to decide on their own financial arrangements during their relationship this statement does give the impression that simply because there is no joint account there is no financial links or accountability between Chloe and James.

This is not the case for married couples or those in civil partnerships.  The legal starting point is quite different to couples who simply live together.  When you enter into a marriage or civil partnership you immediately gain the ability to make a wide range of financial claims against your partner (and likewise they have those claims against you).

If your marriage or civil partnership were to come to an end and you cannot agree how assets should be divided, then the court has the power to divide them between you in line with the factors set out in Section 25 Matrimonial Causes Act.  These factors include (amongst other things) the assets and income of each party, length of the relationship and the contributions you have each made.

The court is not bound to consider monies in a joint account joint nor monies in one person’s sole name as money to be retained solely by them.

There can, however, be circumstances where it is relevant where monies have been held.  For example, if one party had received an inheritance the court may be more minded to exclude that from any settlement if it had always been kept separate in a sole account.

If you or somebody you know wants to understand their legal position better whether they are cohabiting, thinking about cohabiting, engaged or married they should contact one of our specialist family lawyers today.

If you need advice on this topic, or any other matters concerning forced marriage, please get in touch with our team at hello@mcalisterfamilylaw.co.uk

Can my children go on holiday with their grandparents if my ex does not consent?

Can my children go on holiday with their grandparents if my ex does not consent?

Taking children on holiday can often be more challenging between separated parents, but can grandparents take their grandchildren on holiday, and how easy is it in a separated family? Here, Michael Compston looks at court orders, parental responsibility, and offers advice to grandparents looking to plan a holiday.

Firstly, who can take children on holiday? This blog assumes that you and your ex- have separated and no longer live together, but that there is no court order in place; if you do have a court order, you should refer to the warning notices within that order.

Only those individuals with parental responsibility have the capacity to make decisions on who may take children out of the country on foreign holidays. Parents acquire parental responsibility most typically at birth; the mother will acquire it by virtue of being the child’s mother, and the Father will acquire parental responsibility if he is married to the Mother at the time the child’s birth or he is named on the child’s birth certificate as the Father. Similar provisions apply for same-sex couples.

With no court order in place, permission of those with parental responsibility is required before taking children on a foreign holiday. This is the case regardless of who the child lives with. Consent should not be unreasonably withheld – why would a parent not want their child to experience a foreign holiday – but if the holiday is at risk of putting a child in danger, or there are concerns about the children not returning, then consent may be withheld. Consent is often withheld because the ex- is worried about their routine time with the child being interrupted. It may be helpful to consider how any lost time could be made up, if consent is being withheld, as a means to broker an agreement.

Grandparents typically don’t have parental responsibility for children – there are exceptions to this, of course, but we are looking at the general position here. Those with parental responsibility are free to delegate childcare to who they consider appropriate to provide such childcare. We see this when parents work longer hours than children are at school or nursery and grandma or grandad need to collect the children and provide childcare for a couple of hours. We don’t often think about the action of delegating that responsibility as it is simply what many working families do as part and parcel of 21st century life; everybody pitches in for the childcare, especially when both parents work full-time, or close to full-time jobs.

It is advisable for grandparents to plan their holidays well in advance and they must ensure that they have permission of all individuals with parental responsibility. Written consent is not strictly a legal requirement but it would be a very good idea to have something from everyone who has parental responsibility, in writing, that can be shown to any customs officials querying the legal right to take the children on holiday. This is particularly important when the children have a different surname to the grandparents.

If consent is withheld from any individual with parental responsibility, then the grandparents can apply to court for a Specific Issue Order. They will need permission to make such an application, granted by the court, but getting permission to make the application is usually a formality – this is not the same as permission being given to take the children on holiday. The court will list the matter for a Final Hearing where the parties – grandparents and those with parental responsibility – will give evidence in front of a Judge and have the opportunity to cross-examine (ask questions) of the other parties before the Judge makes a final decision.

The Judge will consider first and foremost what is in the child’s best interests. Judges will encourage the parties to come to an agreement but, if no agreement is reached, then they will decide what is in the child’s best interests and make an order accordingly.

Separated parents and international travel during Covid-19 restrictions

Separated parents and international travel during Covid-19 restrictions

As of August 2022, the Covid-19 pandemic continues to affect international travel, for most, this can mean a last-minute rush to the airport to avoid isolation, but for separated parents the added stress of acquiring consent to travel with their child from the other parent can make holidays even more challenging. Here, Heather Lucy explains how the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic can play a role in organising a holiday between separated parents.

 

With holiday season in full swing, many parents want to take the opportunity to take their children on holiday. For most families this tends not to be much of an issue, but for families with separated parents there are a few more things to consider. Firstly, if one parent wants to take a child abroad, whether that be permanently or temporarily, the other parent with parental responsibility will need to give consent. However, anyone with the benefit of a Child Arrangements Order, stating that their child is to ‘live with’ them, is legally allowed to remove the child from England and Wales for a period of less than 28 days without the consent of the other parent, even though they have parental responsibility.

 

What about Covid-19?

As of August 2022, providing you and your child are fully vaccinated, there are 172 countries open to you worldwide, 28 countries that require you to test before you travel, 3 countries that require you to quarantine upon arrival, and only 24 countries fully closed. On the other hand, if either you or your child are unvaccinated or haven’t received all of your vaccinations, only 87 countries are open to you, 71 require you to test before you travel, 19 countries require you to quarantine upon arrival, and 50 countries are fully closed. However, the status of each of these countries so called ‘openness’ can change at any given point.

 

It is understandable then why any parent may have some reservations around their child travelling abroad with their ex-partner, not least because of the fear that once in the destination country, your ex-partner and child might face a period of self-isolation upon their arrival. Again, changes in the status of ‘openness’ can happen at any time and parents can be caught out with an unexpectedly long stay and issues with accommodation. On top of this, there is the ever-present worry around the risk of the child either contracting Covid-19 or transferring it.

Written consent.

If you do wish to travel abroad with your child, the first step is to seek written consent from the other parent before travelling. If this is something which may prove difficult, try to have an open discussion with the other parent; understand and alleviate any fears that they may have by confirming:

  • Travel dates and times
  • Where you will be staying
  • Explain how you will keep the child safe throughout the holiday
  • Explain the rules around quarantine and testing if you are traveling to a country where this is required

Compromise and flexibility is key, but what happens if you cannot come to an agreement or if your ex-partner gives consent but then changes their mind?

You can make an application to the court for a Specific Issue Order stating that you can remove the child from the country and the court will make the final decision. On the other hand, if you are the partner who is not traveling and you haven’t given consent and are worried that your ex-partner will travel with your child regardless, you can apply to the court for a Prohibited Steps Order to prevent them from traveling. If you are in this situation, you should seek legal advice urgently as this may also be considered child abduction.

 

Will the court hear this matter in time?

The court is dealing with a significant amount of cases and there is no guarantee that it will be able to deal with an application such as this as quickly as might be necessary. Our advice is to deal with this matter before it becomes an urgent one. There are alternatives to making a court application, such as engaging your solicitor and seeing if the matter can be negotiated or referring to mediation to see if an arrangement can be reached.

If you are affected by any of the issues outlined here, please get in touch with our specialist teams today.

Can I stop my children going on holiday with my ex’s new partner?

Can I stop my children going on holiday with my ex’s new partner?

With the school holidays here and plans being made for families to go abroad or on holiday in the UK, one of the most frequently asked questions is where a parent stands with their children going on holiday with their ex’s new partner. Here Melissa Jones explains the factors at play when the Court decides whether or not a parent can prevent their children from going on holiday with their ex’s new partner.

Perhaps you have not yet met your ex’s new partner and therefore know little about them or maybe the two of you didn’t get off on the best foot.

Before you make any decisions, with family law cases concerning children, it is always best to start from their point of view and think reasonably as to why you might object to the partner tagging along. You might be worried that the new partner has only just come on the scene and is therefore unfamiliar with your children. This is understandable but is unlikely to convince a court that this holiday should not happen if the partner was to attend.

 

But why should I miss out on time with my children and the new partner gets to spend time with them?

This is understandable, but the court is becoming more familiar with “separated families” or “blended families”. The court will appreciate that parents move on after separation and each should be afforded the opportunity to go on holiday as a family. The focus in this scenario is to ensure you arrange your own holiday(s) with the children so you can enjoy quality time with them, one on one.

It may be that in the future, you may also want to go on holiday with the children and your new partner and you would ideally want this to be fully supported by your children’s other parents.

 

Can I get a court order to stop my ex taking the children on holiday with their partner?

If there is an Order in place, usually a Child Arrangements Order (formerly a Residence Order) then a child can be taken abroad for up to a month without needing the written consent of the other parent.

Parental Responsibility

If there is not a court order in place, what first needs to be considered is whether you have parental responsibility. If both parents share parental responsibility, then what is often overlooked is that your partner will need your written consent in order to take the child out of the United Kingdom (Section 13 (2) of the Children Act 1989). Failing to do so could lead to that parent committing an offence of abduction for which they can be fined, imprisoned or both.

If you object to the partner attending the holiday, you are essentially objecting to the other parent taking the children on holiday. As such, you can make an application to the court for a Prohibited Steps Order, to prohibit the other parent taking the children on the holiday.

Likewise, if the other parent believes your consent is being unreasonably withheld, then they can make an application to the court for a Specific Issuer Order, for permission to take the children on holiday in the absence of your consent.

In either scenario, the Judge will take into account the individual circumstances of each family. The Court rarely denies permission to take a child on holiday abroad where there is an existing relationship between the parent and child and the plans are reasonable in all of the circumstances. The court is unlikely to implement a restriction against the new partner attending in the absence of safeguarding concerns as it is a dispute between the two parents. Any Prohibited Steps Order or Specific Issue Order will relate to the parent either being given permission to go abroad with the children or being prohibited from taking the children on holiday, not in relation to the new partner. It would be very rare for a third party to be named in either order.

When the court denied permission it is usually in circumstances where the plans are patently not in the child’s best interests or where the Court deems the child may not be returned to the country.

 

The child’s best interests

If only one parent has parental responsibility, and again there are no Court orders in place, then permission is not necessarily needed to take a child abroad on holiday. That being said, and with your child’s best interests at heart, consultation should always take place with the other parent (if they are in regular contact with the child) in order to reach an agreement that is right for everyone.

 

Open lines of communication

What is important is communication and trying to agree any travel arrangements between you and the other parent in advance. This is not always possible, but if it can be achieved, it will avoid any applications to the court being necessary.

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

 

 

 

Taking a child on holiday with a different surname

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?

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: –

  1. The child is, or will be going on to higher education, undergoing training for a trade, profession or vocation; or
  2. 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?

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.

MCALISTER HQ LOCATION:

Bass Warehouse
4 Castle Street
M3 4LZ

HOW CAN WE HELP?
HOW CAN WE HELP?

If your enquiry is urgent please call

+44 (0)333 202 6433