Friday, March 11, 2016

Two child support cases, and more thoughts on the future of family law

My posts this week on Marilyn Stowe’s Family Law & Divorce Blog  began with a couple of interesting child support decisions, and ended with further thoughts on the future of the justice system, a theme that seems to be occupying the minds of our senior judiciary:

The child support claimant who feared intimidation - A situation that, I suspect, is not uncommon. WA v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions & Anor (Child support: tribunal practice) demonstrates how it should be handled.

A Kafkaesque child support decision - The Upper Tribunal sorts out an absurd situation in SB v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and & Anor (Child support: calculation of income).

What exactly are the family courts for? - To administer the law, or to solve society's problems?

“Justice has no second class: even in an age of austerity” - At least, that's how it should be. Sir Ernest Ryder's speech The Modernisation of Access to Justice in Times of Austerity.

Have a good weekend.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment on this post. Constructive comments are always welcome, even if they do not coincide with my views! Please note, however, that comments will be removed or not published if I consider that:
* They are not relevant to the subject of this post; or
* They are (or are possibly) defamatory; or
* They breach court reporting rules; or
* They contain derogatory, abusive or threatening language; or
* They contain 'spam' advertisements (including links to any commercial websites).
Please also note that I am unable to give advice.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.