Hayes & Williams' Family Law

Abstract

Hayes and Williams’ Family Law, now in its sixth edition, provides critical and case-focused discussion of the key legislation and debates affecting adults and children. The volume takes a critical approach to the subject and includes ‘talking points’ and focused ‘discussion questions’ throughout each chapter which highlight areas of debate or controversy. The introductory chapter within this edition provides a discussion of the law’s understanding of ‘family’ and the extent to which this has changed over time, a detailed overview of the meaning of private and family life within Article 8 of the ECHR, and a discussion of the Family Justice Review and subsequent developments. Part 1 of this edition, supplemented by the ‘Latest Developments’ section, outlines the most up-to-date statistics on the incidence of marriage, civil partnerships and divorce, discusses recent case law on the validity of marriage such as Hayatleh v Mofdy [2017] EWCA Civ 70 and K v K (Nullity: Bigamous Marriage) [2016] EWHC 3380 (Fam), and highlights the recent Supreme Court decision (In the Matter of an Application by Denise Brewster for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) [2017] 1 WLR 519) on the pension rights of unmarried cohabitants. It also considers the litigation concerning the prohibition of opposite-sex civil partnership registration from the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Steinfeld and Keidan v Secretary of State for Education [2017] EWCA Civ 81 to the important decision of the Supreme Court in R (on the application of Steinfeld and Keidan) (Application) v Secretary of State for International Development (in substitution for the Home Secretary and the Education Secretary) [2018] UKSC 32. This edition also provides an in-depth discussion of the recent Supreme Court decision in Owens v Owens [2018] UKSC 41 regarding the grounds for divorce and includes discussion of Thakkar v Thakkar [2016] EWHC 2488 (Fam) on the divorce procedure. Further, this edition also considers the flurry of cases in the area of financial provision on divorce such as Waggott v Waggott [2018] EWCA Civ 722; TAB v FC (Short Marriage: Needs: Stockpiling) [2016] EWHC 3285; FF v KF [2017] EWHC 1903 (Fam); BD v FD (Financial Remedies: Needs) [2016] EWHC 594 (Fam); Juffali v Juffali [2016] EWHC 1684 (Fam); AAZ v BBZ [2016] EWHC 3234 (Fam); Scatliffe v Scatliffe [2016] UKPC 36; WM v HM [2017] EWFC 25; Hart v Hart [2017] EWCA Civ 1306; Sharp v Sharp [2017] EWCA Civ 408; Work v Gray [2017] EWCA Civ 270, and Birch v Birch [2017] UKSC 53. It also considers the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Mills v Mills [2018] UKSC 38 concerning post-divorce maintenance obligations between former partners, and the Privy Council decision in Marr v Collie [2017] UKPC 17 relating to the joint name purchase by a cohabiting couple of investment property.Part 2 focuses on child law, examining the law on parenthood and parental responsibility, including the parental child support obligation. This edition includes discussion of new case law on provision of child maintenance by way of global financial orders (AB v CD (Jurisdiction: Global Maintenance Orders)[2017] EWHC 3164), new case law and legislative/policy developments on section 54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (parental orders transferring legal parenthood in surrogacy arrangements), and new cases on removing and restricting parental responsibility (Re A and B (Children: Restrictions on Parental Responsibility: Radicalisation and Extremism) [2016] EWFC 40 and Re B and C (Change of Names: Parental Responsibility: Evidence) [2017] EWHC 3250 (Fam)). Orders regulating the exercise of parental responsibility are also examined, and this edition updates the discussion with an account of the new Practice Direction 12J (on contact and domestic abuse), and controversial case law addressing the tension between the paramountcy of the child’s welfare and the protected interests of a parent in the context of a transgender father’s application for contact with his children (Re M (Children) [2017] EWCA Civ 2164). Part 2 also examines the issue of international child abduction, including in this edition the Supreme Court’s latest decision, on the issue of repudiatory retention (Re C (Children) [2018] UKSC 8). In the public law, this edition discusses the Supreme Court’s clarification of the nature and scope of local authority accommodation under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 (Williams v London Borough of Hackney [2018] UKSC 37). In the law of adoption, several new cases involving children who have been relinquished by parents for adoption are examined (Re JL & AO (Babies Relinquished for Adoption),[2016] EWHC 440 (Fam) and see also Re M and N (Twins: Relinquished Babies: Parentage) [2017] EWFC 31, Re TJ (Relinquished Baby: Sibling Contact) [2017] EWFC 6, and Re RA (Baby Relinquished for Adoption: Final Hearing)) [2016] EWFC 47).

Attention to vulnerable people in the First Constitutional and Social Transitory Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Republic in Lima

“…In the category of "procedural burden", it is characterized by the number of cassation appeals that are filed for review by this supreme court. In this sense, according to Gilmore and Glenon (2018), the procedural burden is the number of cases to be resolved that has a direct impact on the work of the jurisdictional servants and is closely related to judicial productivity. For which, the action of the subcategory "Human Resources" is required, which refers to the human potential, that is, the personnel that each State entity has for the development of its objectives and purposes (Munday, 2018).…”

Divergent Gender Revolutions: Cohort Changes in Household Financial Management across Income Gradients

“…In the uK, legal, policy, and technological changes may have also helped "individualize" couples' financial management. The uK Family Law builds on an ideology of unitary collectivism, holding spouses and civil partners financially liable for each other (Gilmore and Glennon 2020). Although assets accumulated during marriage or civil partnership are equally divided upon union dissolution, the division of assets in unmarried cohabitation, which has become more prevalent across cohorts, is determined by each partner's contribution (Gilmore and Glennon 2020).…”

“…The uK Family Law builds on an ideology of unitary collectivism, holding spouses and civil partners financially liable for each other (Gilmore and Glennon 2020). Although assets accumulated during marriage or civil partnership are equally divided upon union dissolution, the division of assets in unmarried cohabitation, which has become more prevalent across cohorts, is determined by each partner's contribution (Gilmore and Glennon 2020). Meanwhile, the uK's taxation and welfare systems-such as calculation and deduction of income tax and welfare payments-have become individualized since the 1980s (Daly and Scheiwe 2010).…”

From universal towards child-specific protection of the right to privacy online: Dilemmas in the EU General Data Protection Regulation

“…In his seminal article on children's rights, Eekelaar (1986) identified three categories of interests that children may claim: basic (physical, emotional and intellectual care), developmental (equal possibilities to maximize available resources) and autonomy (freedom to choose their lifestyle and to enter into social relations). These interests potentially interact: the developmental interests can be advanced if autonomy is exercised, even if mistakes are made, because a child can learn from them (Gilmore and Glennon, 2014). However, the different interests can also conflict, especially in cases when an adolescent's exercising of their autonomy conflicts with their basic interests (e.g.…”