Author: Sarah Hogarth

What happens when the magical once upon a time, does not end happily ever after?

Before the Family Law Act 1981 came into effect, the happy announcement of an engagement was considered to be a legally binding contract. If the engagement was called off without any lawful justification, the person responsible for withdrawing could be sued for damages for breach of promise. 

Whilst this is no longer the law, there are still many issues resulting from the breakdown of such a relationship. It is important to note that whilst engaged couples do not enjoy the same rights as married couples, even though the concerns and issues resulting from the fallout can be similar, they are afforded some unique enhanced protection, as simply compared to cohabiting couples.

Who keeps the ring?

The law is clear on who keeps the ring. S3(2) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970, confirms that an engagement ring should be regarded as an absolute gift, unless there is clear evidence to show that it was agreed to be returned in the event of the relationship ending. 

If the ring is a treasured family heirloom, a court may be more likely to be persuaded that there was an implied intention that it be returned if the relationship ended, but this is by no means guaranteed. Therefore, it is always prudent to record this in writing at the outset, however unromantic it may seem.

Engagement gifts from third parties

There is a presumption that any gifts provided to the happily engaged couple are gifted jointly, absent any evidence to the contrary. In circumstances where the couple unfortunately don’t make it down the aisle, it is unlikely that they will have friends and family banging on their door demanding the return of an air fryer or decorative throw for what was to be the new family home. However, there may be circumstances where family members have gifted substantial financial contributions towards proposed renovations to the new home, or perhaps indeed towards a deposit for a new home. In such a situation, that third party may be able to seek financial remedy through the court. 

Costs associated with the wedding

Depending on how advanced wedding plans were and how close the couple were to the big day, in many cases it is likely that significant sums may have been incurred. The wedding venue, the catering, the photographer/videographer, the band, the dress, the makeup artist, the suits, the cake, the honeymoon; the list goes on and it certainly all adds up. 

For a couple who have met each of these expenses jointly, their only likely recourse is to read the fine print of the contracts with the various suppliers to assess whether there is any chance of a percentage refund of the costs already incurred. 

In circumstances where one party has footed the majority of the deposits and bills, the paying party may struggle to recover the sums incurred from the other aggrieved party, especially in the absence of any clearly documented agreement. The same applies in more traditional settings where the bride’s family may have paid for various expenses towards the wedding and are now seeking compensation from the groom’s side. 

What happens to the house we have bought together?

There is no such thing as a “common law marriage”. Whether the couple have been together for five months, five years or fifty years. 

Unmarried couples often rely on the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (“TOLATA”) should any property dispute arise. This allows a person with a potential beneficial interest in a property to have the nature and extent of their interest assessed and determined by a court, which may result in a number of orders, including an order for sale.  TOLATA proceedings can be both time consuming and costly and largely turn on the veracity of the evidence provided by the parties. 

Importantly, whilst engaged couples do not enjoy the same legal protections as married couples, many are not aware that they do have some enhanced protection as compared to non-engaged cohabiting couples:

• S37 of the Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act 1970

A formerly engaged party may make a claim for an interest in a property where there has been:

• a contribution in money or money’s worth (i.e. paying a builder or undertaking such work yourself);
• to the improvement of a “substantial nature” to real or personal property;
• provided such contribution can be seen to have enlarged both parties’ shares.

However, this claim would be subject to any agreement advanced by the other to the contrary, either express or implied. 

• The Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970 and the Married Women’s Property Act 1882

Most of The Married Women’s Property Act has been repealed. However, S2(2) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970 affirms the application of S17 of the Married Women’s Property Act 1882 to formally engaged couples, providing declaratory relief for ownership of property and personal possessions (such as cars, jewellery etc). Crucially, any claim must also be brought within three years of the engagement ending. 

Protection and prevention

Where engaged couples own significant assets together or gifts have been made in the anticipation of the future happy couples’ big day, they may consider it sensible to enter into a pre-nuptial agreement. Whilst many liken pre-nuptial agreements as an insurance policy for divorce, the agreement may also make provision for what will happen to such property and gifts, as well as wedding expenses, should the wedding not go ahead. 

Similarly, if the couple envisage a longer engagement period, they may consider entering into a cohabitation agreement; again, to record how the assets will be dealt with both during the relationship and, more importantly, upon any breakdown of the relationship. 

In the merriment of a new engagement and the excitement of wedding planning, unromantic practicalities are usually, understandably, not at the top of the priority list. However, where there are assets to protect, prevention is always better than cure.

https://thoughtleaders4.com/images/uploads/news/TL4_HNW_Divorce_Issue_16_-_February_2024.pdf

Sarah Hogarth
Senior Associate at Edwards Family Law

When a couple is getting divorced and dealing with how to separate their finances, who receive the bonus, or even a share of it, can often create problems.  Naturally, the party due to receive the bonus may seek to ‘ringfence’ the award, while the opposing party will argue that it should be part of the overall matrimonial pot and be distributed accordingly.

Issues such as this, which frequently occur and cause arguments, invariably produce a litany of case law, which needs to be considered by both legal advisors and the court in determining a fair financial outcome. To ascertain whether a spouse will be eligible for any degree of a parties’ bonus post separation, one must first explore the law in relation to bonuses received during the marriage.

During marriage

Generally, bonuses awarded while the parties are together are considered matrimonial assets. These are assets acquired during the marriage, or during the period of cohabitation before marriage. Upon reaching a financial settlement, the starting point for a division of the matrimonial assets is a 50/50 split. This can be altered based on each parties’ respective needs. For example, a party who is the primary carer of the children in the marriage, and who possibly has a lower earning capacity, would likely have a greater entitlement to capital from the matrimonial assets if their ‘need’ warranted such a claim. This would include any bonuses accumulated during the marriage.

Post marriage

The situation in relation to bonuses which are obtained post separation is less cut and dry, and usually depends on the circumstances of each case. For example, if there is a maintenance order in favour of the party earning less, it is possible for this individual to be awarded a portion of the payer’s future bonuses. This was explored in the case of H v W [2013] EWHC 4105 where it was originally determined that a wife was to receive maintenance of £3,750 per month plus 25% of the husband’s net annual bonus for the rest of their lives. Given his bonusses were typically circa £250,000, this was not an insignificant amount. Upon appeal, this was drastically reduced and capped at £20,000 per year, although the judge still held that it was necessary for the husband to share his bonus, in order to meet the wife’s future income needs in a fair and proportionate way.

Nevertheless, this case is now over 10 years old. I In recent years courts have taken a less generous approach to sharing bonuses post separation. For example, in the case of Waggot v Waggot [2018] EWCA Civ 727, , the wife’s attempt to have 35% of the husband’s net bonuses for a limited period was rejected. During this case, Lord Justice Moylan stated that, ‘Any extension of the sharing principle to post-separation earnings would fundamentally undermine the court’s ability to effect a clean break.’ The court being required to try and achieve this in every case, if it can. 

In such cases, all bonuses received after a clean break would remain with the spouse receiving the bonus and subsequently, they are not to be shared. This is only relevant to circumstances where there is no spousal maintenance. If such an order is necessary, then bonuses can be used to meet future financial needs, as illustrated above in H v W [2013] EWCH 4105.

Perhaps the most difficult issue to determine when deciding to share bonuses is the timing of when they have been received. During a clean break case, if a party receives a bonus post separation, they may be entitled to believe that it ought not to be shared. However, as the case of O’Dwyer v O’Dwyer [2019] EWCH 1838 demonstrates, if a bonus is earned during the marriage but not paid out until after the marriage has ended, then there is every reason to treat it as matrimonial property in its truest sense. Again, in the case of Rossi v Rossi [2006] EWCH 1482,  MrJustice Mostyn suggested that he ‘would not allow a post-separation bonus to be classed as non-matrimonial unless it related to a period which commenced at least 12 months after the separation’. This would seemingly give risk to the party receiving the bonus that it may still be added to the matrimonial pot, even if earned up to a year following separation.

It is therefore important that a party take legal advice, if they believe that they are either entitled to receive a bonus during their separation, or that their partner is. Here at Edwards Family Law, we are best place to guide you through your potential options and advise you in relation to an outcome which best protects your interests, either in relation to bonuses specifically, or in the broader context of your financial circumstances on divorce.

Every January, the press take great pleasure in writing about Divorce Day, which is considered to be the most popular day for divorce petitions to be filed with the court.  It is fair to say that most family lawyers see an uplift in enquiries at the start of the new year, when in many cases couples have stayed together for the sake of their children, spent Christmas together, and then choose to action their separation more formally once the Christmas decorations have been packed away.

However an issue that has possibly also affected and influenced peoples’ decisions to action their formal separation or divorce, are the increased costs that everyone has been faced with in this present cost of living crisis. Potential clients are becoming increasingly reticent and concerned to initiate proceedings, with many taking advice and then telling us that they want to sit tight, believing a divorce or separation to be ‘unaffordable’ at the moment.

Certainly, mortgage costs have increased exponentially, and house values have simultaneously slumped, with the property market on its knees. The prospect of dividing one house into two and of paying a mortgage at current interest rates, is a very real worry for people. It makes it even harder for them to fathom and deal with the situation than it naturally is in a ‘good’ financial climate.

Some people choose to emotionally separate but not formally move apart and deal with their financial arrangements. This arrangement is often something that we would advise against. Whilst some may believe that they would prefer to wait until asset values increase, the family business picks up, or until the house prices go up, this can be a false economy. Certainly, once a couple (or even one party) has made the decision to separate, staying in a marriage or relationship at that stage can be very claustrophobic and stressful, and can also seriously impact the mental health of children involved in the midst.

It is true to say that this arrangement will also only work if there is complete trust between the separating couple. If there is not, and one of the couple has the majority control of the finances, there is every chance that money might be over-spent, moved around, the ownership of assets changed… It is crucial to deal transparently with financial disclosure in the event of a financial separation and divorce, but if one party is intent on making this difficult, and if they have been given even more time to action any such dealings with any delay in formally sorting out the financial separation, it will make it much harder, and much more expensive, to unpick the truth and work out what a true representation of any financial outcome ought to be.

Prolonging the inevitable might not be the best financial decision in the long term, particularly if pensions need to be divided. We have seen drastic fluctuations in pension valuations recently. Whilst that of course affects everyone across the board, formally sharing pensions on divorce sooner rather than later at least provides some certainty to the recipient party that they have full control of their share of what is often the most significant asset of the marriage or partnership, after the family home, even in a volatile market.

The timetabling of the way in which a person chooses to handle their personal life, and the huge decision of ending a relationship with all the emotional difficulty that comes with that, is entirely their decision. As family lawyers, we must be mindful of the potential pitfalls that come with waiting, which we will always discuss with them honestly but mindfully. Divorce is not something that ought to be, nor is it usually rushed in to, especially when children are involved. In the event that we are instructed to assist, when someone decides to press ahead, our aim is to advise pragmatically from the outset to try to preserve a good working relationship with the other party and/or their solicitor, and give advice that is sensible from the outset in terms of preserving your costs position. If, therefore, one of the big concerns is proportionality in dealing with the case sensibly and cost effectively, and that is what is putting a potential client off from formally actioning their separation, we can certainly assist.  At the very least, anyone who is considering divorce and is concerned about the costs or potential outcome, should get legal advice early on to discuss the pros and cons.   

International travel has boomed since the pandemic, with many families planning trips abroad to make up for lost time.  Holidays can be a great opportunity to create fun memories for children in particular, but what happens when one parent wants to take a child on holiday without the consent of the other parent? This article will consider the law in relation to parental rights, the position on taking children abroad following divorce or separation, and provide guidance to help parents navigate the relevant considerations to be made.

Parental responsibility and the law

The rules around taking a child abroad without consent hinge on the concept of parental responsibility. The Children Act 1989, which defines parental responsibility as “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.” Practically, this means that a person with parental responsibility may make decisions about the child’s upbringing, such as:

• Where the child goes to school;
• How to discipline the child;
• Consenting to the child’s medical treatment; and
• Choosing, registering or changing the child’s name.

How long does parental responsibility last?

Parental responsibility usually comes to an end when the child reaches the age of 18. The responsibility may however end earlier if:

• A court makes an order terminating the responsibility; or
• A child arrangements order ends or is discharged.

Who has parental responsibility?

Parental rights as a mother differ slightly from a fathers’ rights. In England and Wales, a mother automatically has parental responsibility for her child from birth. A parent who is married to or in a civil partnership with the birth mother will also automatically have parental responsibility for the child from birth.

If parents are not married, a father may usually obtain parental responsibility by:

• Being named on the child’s birth certificate or birth registration (if the child was born after 1 December 2003);
• Marrying the child’s mother;
• Entering into a parental responsibility agreement with the child’s birth mother; or
• Applying to a court for parental responsibility, sometimes known as a ‘parental rights order’.

Other adults may acquire parental responsibility in some circumstances, for example, through adoption.

Can parental responsibility be removed?

Parental responsibility will only be removed in extreme cases where it is in the child’s best interest. For example, for the protection of the child’s physical or emotional health. 

Note that the concept of parental responsibility is distinct from the issue of child custody or child arrangements, which concerns a child’s living arrangements, both in terms of where they live and with whom, and the time they spend with the other non-resident parent.

The rules

In order to take a child abroad for any length of time, consent must first be obtained from every individual with parental responsibility for the child. In the absence of consent being provided, the parent seeking to remove the child from the jurisdiction must apply to the court for permission in good time, and certainly well ahead of any planned trip. However, it is worth noting that if there is a child arrangement order which states that the child lives with you (and spends time with the other parent – what used to be called a ‘residence order’), and there are no court orders preventing you from taking the child abroad, then you may take them abroad for up to 28 days without the requirement to obtain consent from the non-resident parent in advance.

Where consent is required, it is advisable to get written consent in the form of a signed letter from each other individual with parental responsibility towards the child. You may be required to produce this letter at the UK or foreign border, or you may need to rely on it in the case of any dispute. The letter should include contact details for the other person. If you and the child do not share a surname then it is also wise to carry documents which evidence your relationship with the child, such as a birth or adoption certificate, a divorce or marriage certificate, or any change of name deed where relevant.

If you are unable to get consent of other individuals with parental responsibility to take a child abroad, you can apply to the family court for permission. This will involve providing details about the trip, such as the destination, and proposed departure and return dates, as well as details of other people with parental responsibility staying in England and Wales. The court will consdier your application and may then make what is referred to as a ‘specific issue order’, allowing the child to go abroad.

Conversely, if a parent or other adult with parental responsibility wishes to prevent a child being taken abroad, perhaps because of concerns that the child will not be brought back to England or Wales, they may apply to the court for a ‘prohibited steps order’ to stop the child being taken abroad.

In each case, the court will consider the wishes of the parents (or other adults with parental responsibility) and decide what is in the child’s best interests. 

As with all matters relation to children, it is preferable to seek to reach an agreement outside of the courts directly with the other parent in the first instance, using open and honest communication, or other means of dispute resolution, such as mediation, before engaging in court proceedings.

What happens if you don’t get permission?

If you do not have the appropriate permission to take a child out of the jurisdiction of England and Wales, or abroad internationally, and you do so anyway, you could face charges of child abduction. Child abduction is a criminal offense under the Child Abduction Act 1984 and it can carry serious consequences.

How can we help

Whether you are divorced or separated we understand that you want to continue creating memories with your child. This issue of taking a child abroad can be complex where there is disagreement amongst adults with parental responsibility for that child. Our experienced team of family lawyers at Edwards Family Law will help you navigate your parental legal rights, responsibilities, the relevant legal procedures and other considerations to ensure that you are able to reach a solution that is in the child’s best interests. If you have any questions, please get in touch with us at Edwards Family Law.

Child maintenance payments play a key role in ensuring the financial support of children whose parents are no longer in a relationship. This article will explore how maintenance payments are calculated in England and Wales and important points to be aware of.

What is child maintenance?

Child maintenance is a regular payment made by the paying parent to the receiving parent of a child following divorce or separation. It can also be payable even if the parents have never been in a relationship.  The maintenance payments cover the child’s living costs when one of the parents does not live with the child. The person paying child maintenance, the “paying parent”, is the person who does not have the main day-to-day care of the child. The receiving parent is the person who does have the main day-to-day care of the child. 

A child maintenance agreement must be in place if the child is under 16, or under 20 and still in full time education, up to and including A level or equivalent. Child maintenance payments may be agreed privately between parents, or can be put in place more formally by the Child Maintenance service (CMS). The CMS calculates weekly child maintenance payments using a six step process, which takes into account various factors with the aim of arriving at a fair figure. It is possible to use the CMS calculator and use that figure privately and ‘informally’ between parents.

Working out child maintenance

If the CMS is contacted by the parent with the main day-to-day care of the child and is asked to formally assess the amount payable, the following steps are undertaken.

Step 1 – working out income

The CMS will gather information from HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) to ascertain the paying parent’s annual gross income. The CMS will also check if the paying parent is receiving benefits. Tax credits, student grants and loans will not be counted as income.

Step 2 – looking at factors affecting income

The CMS will check for factors which could increase or decrease the gross income amount, for example, pension payments, and/or other children the paying parent is supporting. 

Either parent may ask for extra income, assets or expenses to be taken into account, such as:

• Rental income exceeding £2,500 a year;
• Interest and dividends from savings and investments exceeding £2,500 a year;
• Any income the paying parent may be diverting to avoid it being included in the calculation (for example, by giving it to someone else); and
• Assets like shares, stocks, gold or money worth more than £31,250.

As the paying parent, you may ask for the following expenses to be taken into account:

• Costs of keeping in contact with a child you pay maintenance for (for example, fuel to travel between your home and the child’s home with the other parent);
• Costs of supporting a child with a disability or long-term illness who lives with you;
• Repaying debts from a previous relationship;
• Boarding part of boarding school fees for a child you pay maintenance for; and/or
• Mortgage, loan or insurance payments for the home you used to share with the receiving parent – if the receiving parent and your child still live there.

The CMS will then convert the yearly gross income into a weekly figure.

Step 3 – applying child maintenance rates

There are 5 different rates and the one that applies will depend on the gross weekly income of the paying parent:

Gross weekly income	Rate	Weekly amount
Unknown or not provided	Default	£38 for 1 child, £51 for 2 children, £64 for 3 or more children
Below £7	Nil	£0
£7 – £100, or if the paying parent gets benefits	Flat	£7
£100.01 – £199.99	Reduced	Calculated using a formula
£200 – £3,000	Basic	Calculated using a formula

If the paying parent’s gross weekly income exceeds £3,000, the receiving parent may apply to the Family Court for extra child maintenance in the form of a ‘top up’ order.

Step 4 – other children

The CMS will take into account how many children the paying parent has to pay maintenance for, whether this has been arranged privately by the parents, or through the CMS.

Step 5 – weekly amount of child maintenance

Using all the gathered information, the CMS will decide the weekly child maintenance amount.

Step 6 – shared care

Occasionally the paying parent’s child may stay overnight with the paying parent. Where this is the case, CMS will make a deduction from the weekly child maintenance amount based on the average number of ‘shared care’ nights in a week.

Changes to child maintenance payments

The amount due for child maintenance payments may change as a result of the CMS’ annual review of a case. Each parent may apply for a variation. 

There are certain changes which must be reported to CMS by law, such as:

• A change in how often the child stays overnight with the other parent;
• A change of address (CMS must be notified within 7 days of moving);
• A change in who the child’s main carer is; or
• A change of bank details. 

Failure to provide requested information or the deliberate provision of false information could result in a fine of up to £1,000.

If a parent is unhappy with the CMS calculation of maintenance payments, they must ask for the decision to be looked at again in a process called ‘Mandatory Reconsideration’, before they will be allowed to submit an appeal to the Social Security and Child Support Tribunal.

How we can help

It is important to reach a child maintenance agreement that is in the best interests of the child, and fair to both parents. Whether you need support in reaching a child maintenance agreement privately, or you would prefer to use the CMS process, our experienced team of family lawyers at Edwards Family Law will help you navigate your options and help you reach a suitable solution.