Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2015] All ER (D) 49 (Jan)
Neutral Citation: [2014] EWHC 4306 (Fam)
Court: Family Division
Judge:

Holman J

Representation Louise Potter appeared on behalf of the mother.
  Richard Spicer appeared on behalf of the father.
Judgment Dates: 19 December 2014

Catchwords

Family proceedings - Orders in family proceedings - Financial provision - Children - Father making payments to mother in respect of child post separation - Father making reduced payments - Mother 's income being reduced and mother seeking to appeal reduction - Mother also applying to enforce payment of periodic payments - Whether periodic payments order to be restored - Whether mother entitled to lump sum - .

The Case

Family proceedings Orders in family proceedings. The mother and father separated following period of cohabitation and one child. An order was made by the court in regard to the level of payments required by the father. The father in due course applied under of the Child Support Act 1991 to the Secretary of State and the Child Maintenance Service for that service to fix the legal level of maintenance. The mother did not accept that reasoning, nor the application of the section to the actual facts and circumstances. As a result, she sought to appeal. She also applied to the court for restoration of the previous order or a top up under s 8 of the 1991 Act. The Family Division held that there was no jurisdiction to make a 'top up' order. However a lump sum payment was ordered to fund her appeal.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.