Family FAQs

1. The conventional legal approach
   This involves both your sister and her former partner seeing individual solicitors. The solicitors would write to each other with proposals and counter proposals to try and reach an agreement concerning their children and financial matters. That might include transferring properties, sharing savings or dealing with debts and other important matters which arise in those circumstances. If the problems cannot be resolved in that way then sometimes an application has to be made to the Court over the children and/or the money. The solicitors don't tend to meet with each other to discuss the case and the transaction is dealt with at arm's length.
2. Mediation
   This is where a qualified family Mediator would see both your sister and her ex partner. Although he or she may be a lawyer with a wealth of family law experience the Mediator would not advise either of them. What he will do is give them legal information so that they can make informed decisions. If a solution is reached in that way, it can be translated into a legally binding agreement. There are different ways in which this can be done.
3. Collaborative Law
   This is a relatively new concept whereby your sister and her ex will meet together in the same room with their own independent legal advisors to try and resolve their difficulties together. No applications are made to the court unless by agreement. During the meeting both the client and solicitor can withdraw into a separate room and be given advice before returning to the meeting.

In all of these processes there needs to be full disclosure of all financial matters to try and reach a fair solution for the children, your sister and her former partner.

Mediation is a voluntary process whereby separating couples try to resolve their differences in connection with the children and financial matters without going to court. Mediation can be used even if you have instructed a solicitor. A mediator will not take sides or make decisions on your behalf but will gather information and help you formulate the best outcome for all concerned. If a solution is reached concerning the children then it is very unlikely that court orders would be necessary. If financial matters are looked at then both of you would need to be open and honest about your financial position.

The mediation process is without prejudice which means that either of you could change your mind afterwards and is not legally binding. However, if you agree to waive the without prejudice provision, this would mean that you could then enter into a written agreement which can be legally binding.

To make the agreement legally binding, the mediator can do this if you both agree or a solicitor can do this for you. Once this is has been done, it cannot be contested provided both of you have provided correct information.

Most lawyers would encourage you to try and reach a solution which is legally binding.

We are often requested to give advice to grandparents about their rights to see a grandchild or grandchildren in circumstances where they are estranged from the children's parents. This sometimes occurs in situations where grandparents and the children's parents have fallen out but more often in circumstances where the parents have separated and the children continue to live with the parent who is not a blood relative of the grandparents.

It is possible for a grandparent to apply to the court for an Order for contact with the grandchild or grandchildren. The grandparent must first of all apply for the leave of the Court to make the application This is a hurdle that most people applying for contact with a child (other than the parent) have to jump over but is not usually a problem in a genuine case. If the Court grants leave then the application progresses.

There is no presumption in favour of contact for grandparents but such applications are regularly granted by the Court where they are genuinely made and in the children's best interests. The overriding concern that the Judge has when making a decision is what is in the best interests of the children. Grandparents, of course, have very special roles to play in children's lives and contact should therefore be encouraged where at all possible.

Where children are taken into care by the local authority, the social services are under a duty and obligation to consider all of the extended family before an Order is made for children to be taken into care. Therefore if grandchildren were the subject of such proceedings grandparents would always be considered as potential carers before the children are taken away from the family. This would involve a full assessment being carried out on the grandparents if they were putting themselves forward as carers.

There is no change in the law regarding who can apply to the court for child maintenance. The only situations where such an application can be made are where there is an existing Court Order making provision for child maintenance, where the parent living with the children is abroad, where the other parent lives abroad and doesn't work for a UK based employer; and where a child reaches the age of 19 or ceases full time secondary education.

All parents not living with their children have a legal duty to contribute financially to the children's upbringing. It is best to agree the amount payable. If agreement is not possible then the only way forward for most people is to apply to the CSA, which hasn't been disbanded, but has changed some of its procedures. No one will now be forced to use the CSA even if they are on a means tested benefit such as Income Support. Any parent living with their children and in receipt of one of these benefits will have £20 per week (not per child) of any child maintenance disregarded when their benefit is calculated.

Receipt of child maintenance still doesn't affect any other benefits. The benefit claimant must still inform the benefit provider of any receipt of child maintenance. Failure to do so could lead to a prosecution for fraud and /or the repayment of benefit monies.

The above is not a comprehensive guide. Further information can be obtained from the CSA website, www.csa.gov.uk . It is always a good idea to seek professional advice on any question of child maintenance.

Your husband's pension is a matrimonial asset and you certainly do have the right to have this taken into account when sorting out a settlement. A settlement is negotiated by both parties putting all their cards on the table and giving full financial disclosure to the other. This can be done voluntarily but it may be necessary to issue Court proceedings. That financial disclosure includes details of all assets including property, savings, investments and pensions, all debts and all income from all sources.

When looking at a settlement the starting point is a 50:50 split of all assets. However the overriding concern is to provide for any children of the marriage. There is a list of factors that have been set down by parliament which has to be taken into account when negotiating a settlement.

When dealing with your husband's pension there are three choices. The pension can be offset so that your husband keeps all of his pension and you receive more of the capital of the marriage to compensate you. There can be a pension earmarking order or it is possible to have a pension sharing order to provide for you for the future. However you should seek advice from a solicitor to discuss your particular options.

It is possible for you and your husband to attend Mediation (this is a scheme where you meet with a trained independent Mediator to try to resolve matters between you without the need for Court proceedings). Alternatively you can negotiate between solicitors and ultimately if agreement cannot be reached it may be necessary to ask a Judge to make a decision as to your entitlement.

If you work for at least 16 hours a week, you should be entitled to Working and Child Tax Credit. You should make a claim at once. If you and your husband, as a couple, were claiming Tax Credits you still need to make a fresh claim for yourself, as a single parent.

If you work for under 16 hours, you should make an appointment to see a Lone Parent Advisor at your local Jobcentre. He or she will be able to advise whether you will be better off continuing to work or going on to Income Support.

Tax Credits have had a lot of bad press and people worry that they'll end up paying back huge overpayments. This shouldn't happen if you complete the application form carefully. In some cases, receipt of Tax Credits can double someone's wages.

Your husband has a legal liability to pay Child Support Maintenance. Try to agree a reasonable figure with him, based on the CSA'S calculations. If your husband won't agree to pay anything, then your only alternative is to make an application through the CSA.

If you are continuing to work, you should claim a Council Tax rebate of 25%. This is yours as of right, if you are the only adult living in your property. If you are on Income Support, you will receive full Council Tax benefit, on application.

It is usually preferable, if possible, to work and claim tax credits. If you are on income support, you won't receive help with a mortgage for the first 9 months of your claim, unless the mortgage was taken out prior to October 1995.

If you wish to remain in the house, you will need to be able to meet the outgoings from your own income therefore you should see a solicitor as soon as possible, to ensure you are receiving what you are entitled to.

A store card or credit card will be in the name of one person. The fact that the other partner has a second card will make no difference to this. The creditor will only pursue the person who is party to the contract.

Often credit facilities are used partly for the family such as holidays, furniture, groceries and fuel. It is often the luck of the draw who took out the credit. Fairness would suggest that those items are shared equally and often this can be negotiated between solicitors or using mediation. Sometimes you have to analyse from the back statements how the cards have been used.

It can be a bit of a paper trail especially if the credit cards have been used to take advantage of low or no interest deals. It is also easy if the card has been used for just one purchase such as golf equipment for the husband and clothing on a store card exclusively for the wife. If the Court looks at family finances in the round, as it can do, it may adjust any lump sum to take into account family debt.

No. You both have something known as Parental Responsibility. You both share in the important decisions relating to the children.

Most importantly you clearly have what I would describe as a shared care arrangement. The children spend time with both of you as their parents. The word "contact" in this context is in my view inappropriate. It is not therefore for one of you to impose different times on the other. It is no more for you to say to your former wife that you now want the children to stay with you all of the time, than it is for her to say that the children will only stay with you every other weekend.

If there was any dispute about your shared care arrangement, the court can be asked to underpin this arrangement by making a shared Residence Order. However, the two of you have clearly been able to work matters out to this stage and going to court about matters should be avoided.

Instead you need to come to an arrangement that is in the best interests of your children, whereby you perhaps alter the times that the children spend with you. You do not have to have the children for half the time in order to have a shared residence situation. For example, the children could spend more time with you during the holiday periods. It may be that the children could stay with you three out of four weekends so that your former wife has at least one weekend that she can spend with them.

Each situation and solution is different. I would encourage you to work together to reach an arrangement and advise you take legal advice as solicitors can certainly help form an agreement between the two of you without involving the courts.

This is certainly not true. There is no such status as a common law wife or a common law husband.

Wives are often concerned that when they split up with their husband and the husband then lives with another partner, should they in turn split up after 6 months, the new partner will be entitled to maintenance. Also there is a concern that if the man dies the partner can claim on his estate.

At the present time, there are no maintenance claims between unmarried couples who have lived together whether they are different sex or same sex. You may have seen in the press that there are concerns that the law should alter to establish such claims, which worries a lot of couples who live together and choose not to enter into a relationship with rights and potential claims when it ends.

There is a high level of uncertainty when it comes to the legal position of unmarried couples who live together. People don't want to contemplate the possibility of splitting up, but if you are unsure as to what may happen to you in the event that you do split up, you should consider making a Cohabitation Agreement. This is a contract setting out the income and capital position between the couple and states who will be responsible for the bills and assets whilst they are together and who to have what in the event of a split.

At Wilkin Chapman, we have a team of qualified lawyers who are experienced in drafting such agreements.

When a couple divorce the Court looks at the assets that they have and other things such as the length of the marriage, the contributions each has made in money and bringing up children, the age of the couple, their net assets and what they claim they need for the future.

In the past if there was a short marriage you took out what you put in. However, the 2006 case of Miller and McFarlane analysed the law again. If a short marriage ends through no fault of one spouse, then the other, usually the wife, might receive more than she put in and she could be compensated for the loss of future standard of living. Capital division and maintenance might therefore not be restricted to reasonable needs.

Many people now live together before marriage. This might be relevant too and the Court would look at how they had ran their financial affairs in that period. The Court may also look at inheritances and resources available before or after the marriage in a different light.

People with substantial assets and earnings should consider pre-nuptial agreements although currently English law does not consider these as legally binding, merely evidence of the couple's intentions at the time. This may well change.

An Injunction is a Court Order forbidding someone certain action. If you were married to, or lived with your ex partner and/or you have children together, you are 'associated persons' for the purposes of the Family Law Act 1996 and you may apply to the Court for an Injunction under that Act.

The Act provides for Non-Molestation and Occupation Orders. It sounds as though a Non-Molestation Order would be appropriate in your case.

You should write a detailed diary of the harassment you have suffered to date and make an appointment with a solicitor, taking the diary with you. The first step is likely to be a letter to your ex, telling him to stop the harassment. If he does not, your solicitor can draft the necessary documents for an Injunction Application. You should continue to keep your diary as this will form your evidence in support of your application.

Your solicitor will assess whether or not you are entitled to Legal Aid. If so, you may still have to pay a contribution to the cost of the matter before the Court. If not, you will have to pay your solicitors costs yourself although you may obtain an Order that your ex pays you back.

Presuming your application is successful, your ex should be ordered to stay away from you, your home and your work place and will not be allowed to telephone, text or email you. This can cause problems with your ex having contact with the children, but your solicitor can assist to work out contact arrangements around the terms of the Injunction Order.

You can apply to the Court for a Non-Molestation Order, (an injunction) to prevent your husband from harassing, pestering or threatening you. If you are entitled to public funding on financial grounds, (very few people are) it may be necessary for your solicitor to write a letter to your husband first and for you to notify the Police. It would be advisable for you to ask your solicitor to write first in any event. Even if you are not entitled to public funding and it is not appropriate for such a letter to be written, or this was done and ignored, it would be possible for you to apply to the Court for an Order. This is done by way of an application and you would have to swear an Affidavit giving full details of the harassment etc that you are alleging. The Court would then list this for a hearing and in the circumstances you described, your husband would be given notice of the hearing date. It is possible to apply to the Court without giving him notice, if violence is alleged and you are in fear of your safety. Depending on whether your husband turns up and the Judge is happy with your application, the Order may be made that day, or if this is defended by your husband, it will be listed for a contested hearing as soon as the Court has time to hear the matter.

You should also be aware that harassment is a criminal offence and you may prefer to report his behaviour to the Police, in the hope that they will issue him with a harassment warning, or consider prosecution.

It is possible to apply to the Court for an Occupation Order. This is an Order that the Court would make forcing your partner to vacate the property and allowing you and the children to go back until matters regarding the ownership and occupation of the property are sorted out. You could also apply for a Non-Molestation Order, which forbids your partner from assaulting and harassing you or threatening to assault you etc. It may be that public funding (legal aid) would be available to assist you making these applications depending on your financial circumstances and the requirements of the Legal Services Commission. You should seek urgent advice.

Changing a child's surname is a simple and quick process. Every person with Parental Responsibility for the child will need to sign the Change of Name Deed. As you were married to your oldest child's father, he will therefore need to consent to the Change of Name Deed and sign the Deed. If the father does not agree, you would need to have the Court's permission to change the child's name, which will only be given in limited circumstances.

In respect of your youngest child you have not stated whether or not the father was named on the Birth Certificate. After the 1st December 2003, an unmarried father named on the Birth Certificate has Parental Responsibility. Therefore, if he was named on the Birth Certificate then the father will have Parental Responsibility and the process would be the same as above.

If he is not named, then you can change your child's name without the father's permission. However, it would be advisable to seek his agreement especially if he is involved with the child, because an unmarried father with no Parental Responsibility can apply to the Court for an Order to return the child's name back to his.

As your child is to be born after the 1 December 2003 your partner will have Parental Responsibility for the child if your partner is named on the Child's Birth Certificate. Parental Responsibility is a parents rights and responsibilities in respect of their child. If a father has Parental Responsibility he must be consulted on issues such as the child's name, religion, education, health and welfare. It is your decision if you decide to register your partner's name on the child's birth certificate. If you do not then your partner will not automatically receive Parental Responsibility.

Your situation would be different if you were married, as a married father automatically gains Parental Responsibility for his children irrespective of whether he is named on the child's Birth Certificate or not.

Babies born to unmarried father's prior to the 1 December 2003 did not gain Parental Responsibility automatically even if they are registered on the child's Birth Certificate. In these circumstances Parental Responsibility can only be gained either with the mother's agreement or by way of a Court Order.

There are a couple of options open to you. Firstly either directly or with the assistance of a solicitor you can try to come to some form of agreement with your daughter. Hopefully, this will be successful and you can start to enjoy contact again.

If negotiations are not possible then an agreement may be reached by attending mediation with your daughter. A qualified mediator will try to assist you and your daughter in overcoming any difficulties, but if mediation is unsuccessful, or your daughter is reluctant to go to mediation, then your only other option would be to pursue the matter with an application to the court.

As you are the grandparent of the children you will require the permission of the court to bring the application. In effect this is another hurdle for you to cross prior to bringing your application. If your daughter cannot show any good reason why you should not bring your application then it is usual for the court to allow your application to proceed.

The matter will then be decided upon by the court usually after an investigation by the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS).

As you both will know friends and family give you suggestions about what you should be doing but Mediation is a process where both of you would meet together with a neutral third party.

The mediator can give you legal and financial information to help you make choices. Mediation leaves you in charge of not only the agenda but also the outcome. None of us like being told what to do and skilled mediators are able to assist you in reaching a solution. After all, you two and your son are the people who have to live with the outcome and a negotiated solution is more likely to work than one imposed by others.

It is less costly and a speedier process that the Court system. Even if you no not reach a solution it should narrow the areas of dispute so I think it would be worth a try. You can also see a solicitor for advice alongside the mediation process and any agreement that you have tentatively reached can then be turned into a legally binding agreement.

The answer until as recently as December 2005 would have been no, however, it is now possible for married step fathers to gain parental responsibility by agreement. The agreement has to be made with all other persons who have parental responsibility for the child. If the child's biological father does not have parental responsibility you would only need your wife's agreement. If he had parental responsibility then he would also need to agree to you having parental responsibility and sign the agreement. The agreement needs to be on the prescribed form, correctly executed and lodged with the Principal Registry of the Family Division to be effective (in the same way as with parental responsibility agreements between parents). Assuming those parents with parental responsibility agree for the married step parent to have parental responsibility then this is a much quicker, easier and cheaper route than applying through the Court system. At the moment, these rules apply to married step-parents.

Dealing firstly with the issue of contact. The presumption is that your daughter shall continue to have contact with you on a regular basis unless there is a very good reason for you not having contact. Most parents are able to come to an agreement regarding contact. If this is not possible, you could always try to negotiate matters with the assistance of a Mediator. If this proves unsuccessful, it would then be open to you to apply to the Court for an Order under the Children Act 1989 allowing you contact on a regular basis.

Secondly, as you are an unmarried father and your daughter was born before the 1st December 2003, you do not have Parental Responsibility for your daughter. Parental Responsibility describes the rights and responsibility a parent has for their child. It means that if you have Parental Responsibility, you will need to be consulted on key elements of your child's upbringing i.e. welfare, health and education. As you do not have Parental Responsibility, you can obtain this by agreement with the Mother. If this is not forthcoming, then you can apply to the Court for a Parental Responsibility Order. The Courts will usually grant this if you can show a level of commitment towards the child.

On the 1st December 2003, the law changed in respect of Parental Responsibility. Now an unmarried father who is named on the child's birth certificate will automatically have Parental Responsibility for that child.

In England gay couples cannot marry although this is possible in other countries. However, as of 5th December 2005 you can enter into what is called a Civil Partnership under the Civil Partnership Act of 2004.

The purpose of the law is to bring as much equality as possible with marriage whilst marriage remains only open to straight couples.

To register for this you will need to sign a Civil Partnership document which is also signed by the registrar and witnesses.

Each Council has to set up its own procedures so you will need to contact the Council for specific local information procedures.

One very important consequence of registration is what happens on the death of the first of you. The survivor may sort out the estate and there will be a postponement of tax payments in most cases until the death of the survivor.

A Civil Partnership Document has legal status and to terminate the Civil Partnership procedures similar to divorce have to be undertaken. In those circumstances a Court can entertain financial claims between the separated Partners broadly similar to divorce. Orders can be sought from the Court for maintenance, lump sum payments, pension sharing and altering rights in property so it is not to be undertaken lightly and without legal advice as to the specific implication for both parties.

There are basically three different options available to you. The first option is offsetting, where you can take more of the capital available now in lieu of a share of the pension. The second option is pension earmarking where the fund remains your husband's but a proportion of that is earmarked for you. The difficulty with earmarking is your pension rights would be lost if/when your husband dies or if you remarry. The third option is to split the pension so you have your own pension from your husbands.

Pensions are given a value known as a CETV or Cash Equivalent Transfer Value. The CETV is not often accepted by the court as being a true reflection of the value of a pension, i.e. £100,000 CETV on a pension is not the same as £100,000 cash or equity in a house. The reason for this is that pension scheme rules greatly limit what can be done with pension funds. Unhelpfully a pension with £100,000 CETV may not in real terms provide the same benefits as a pension with another supplier with the same CETV. To further compound the problem an equal division of the CETV of the fund is highly unlikely to yield the same benefits for both husband and wife.

The law on pensions on divorce is a complex issue and the division of pensions will be determined by the individual facts of the case. Early legal advice and if appropriate independent financial advice is recommended.

I am pleased to read that you have heard about Mediation as a way of trying to resolve family disputes. It has been mentioned in several of the Soaps recently and I guess that most people now realise it is not a process to try and get you back together. A mediator is impartial and would help you both and meet with you both together. His role is to give you the right information to help you make decisions. Most people do wish to be fair but do not know what fair is, nor indeed some of the options that are open to them. A mediator will not try to make problems that you do not have but will stick to your agenda.

The process tends to be quicker and cheaper than the Court process and means that you are in charge of the decisions. None of us like to be told what to do, do we! Some people are eligible for Legal Aid and do not have to pay for the service.

It is not possible to create a legally binding agreement in mediation unless you wish that to happen. Often, before people agree to this, they will see a solicitor to look through the proposed agreement before it is made legally binding either as a contract known as a Separation Agreement or as a Court Order in divorce proceedings if the relationship has broken down completely.

Parental responsibility is rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his or her property. This exists for the benefit of the child and not for the benefit of the parent. Anybody with parental responsibility should be consulted concerning important matters about the child's upbringing , such as education, the child's surname, removing the child from England and Wales.

The mother of a child automatically has parental responsibility. A father automatically has parental responsibility if he was married to the mother at the time of the child's birth or if the registration of the child's birth takes place after 1st December 2003 and the father is registered as the father on the birth certificate . He can obtain P.R. by way of a Parental Responsibility Agreement (consented to by the mother) or by an Order of the Court. Other people can be granted parental responsibility such as an adopter of a child, a person granted a Residence Order, a local authority in whose favour a Care Order has been made etc.

Parental responsibility should not be confused with a Residence Order which defines where a child shall live.

If a father without parental responsibility applies to the Court for such an Order then he is likely to be granted this provided that he can show sufficient commitment to the child. It is important that a father who has regular contact has parental responsibility as only a person with parental responsibility can consent to emergency medical treatment.

A child's name can be changed by the parent(s) with parental responsibility executing a change of name deed. This is a quick and straightforward process.

Parental responsibility is automatically gained by mothers upon the birth of their child. Fathers can gain it through marriage to the child's mother, agreement with the child's mother or Court order. For children born after 1st December 2003, fathers named on their child's birth certificate will automatically obtain parental responsibility. Whilst all parents with parental responsibility must agree to the change of name it is good practice to seek the agreement of fathers who do not have parental responsibility but who have involvement with their child. This reduces the likelihood of friction between the parents and the potential of Court proceedings. A father without parental responsibility could in theory apply to the Court for a review of the decision to change the name of the child, such applications are however rare.

Your friend is incorrect. Generally speaking where arrangements have been amicably agreed upon between separating couples, be it husband and wife or merely cohabitees, the Court will not need to interfere in the arrangements that the parents have sensibly made unless there is a need to do so. Indeed the opening part of the Children Act 1989 specifically directs the Court not to make an Order unless it needs to do so.

It is what we call the “no order” principle. It simply means that parents should be encouraged to reach agreements relating to their children without the need for the Courts to have to intervene.

Of course, in some cases the parents cannot agree upon the arrangements. They may both want for the children to live with them and a dispute may then arise. It is only in those circumstances that Court Applications have to be made and the Court adjudicates upon the matter.

It is the same whether or not there were divorce proceedings between you at this point in time. Provided the Court is happy with the arrangements that have been made, then they will not interfere.

The two of you have of course worked hard to bring about an arrangement which seems to suit everybody and provided that the children are happy and well looked after that is of course the main and most important thing.

Firstly I would advise you that you need to have been married at least a year before you should make any application. It is, of course, a priority that you find out whether your ex-husband is prepared to agree to the adoption. If the children are adopted then this means that he has no rights or responsibilities in respect of the children at all. If he continues to have a regular relationship with them then, of course, the chances are that he will not agree to this. If he does not see them, then he may well agree because the other effect of adoption is that he is no longer responsible to maintain the children.

To apply for adoption you first of all need to give the local Social Services at least three months notice of your intention to apply. They will then arrange to visit you and will prepare an indepth report. It is not an easy procedure. They will be very thorough in their report and will want to interview all parties involved and speak to your ex-husband. After the three months you are able to apply to the Court for an Order. You should note that you both have to apply to Court to adopt the children. Effectively this means that you, of course, are applying to adopt your own children. The Court will then list the matter for a Hearing once the Social Services report has been received. If your ex-husband is consenting and the Social Services report agrees with the application, then there should be no difficulty in persuading a Judge to make the Order. If your ex-husband does not consent and/or Social Services are not supportive then there maybe the need for a Contested Hearing.

There are two things that you can do. Firstly, you must notify the police of the situation. They will be able to assist you with practical matters, such as who to contact if you have any problems and the necessary telephone numbers. It is important that the local police are aware of the situation. Secondly, a solicitor will be able to assist you with obtaining a Non-Molestation Order (more commonly known as an Injunction). Usually to obtain public funding (legal aid) for a Non-Molestation Order you must show that the police have been involved and that this has not helped. You must also show that a letter has been sent by a solicitor to the person concerned and that this has not sorted out the problem. However, in the circumstances of your case, it is very likely that you would obtain emergency public funding to apply for an Order that would be effective from the date that he is released from prison. This would order him to keep away from you and your property. The Order could be obtained ex parte, i.e. without the need for him to be informed of you applying for it. It is also possible to apply for a Power of Arrest to be attached in such circumstances. This would assist the police as they would be able to arrest him immediately if he broke the terms of the Order and came near the property.

You need to apply to the Court for an Order to remove the children from the jurisdiction. There are lots of factors that the Court has to consider when looking at such an application. The welfare of your children is the most important factor. The Court will consider your proposals and reasons for wanting to live abroad. It will also consider the effect on you and the children if it refuses your application. The Court will, however, also consider the effect that such a move would have on the children's contact with their father. Recent case law shows that if you were to set out your case in a reasonable way, with a well thought out plan, then the chances are that you will be given leave to take the children with you. You must have a genuine reason for the wish to live abroad and there must be no question of the Court feeling that this is simply to prevent the children's father having contact with them. A decision will be made on the facts of your particular case.

No. There is no obligation to allow the contact. As an unmarried father your former partner does not start with many clear cut rights. However in the event that contact arrangements cannot be made between you and himself, he has the right to apply to the court for an Order for Contact.

You have obviously now reached the stage where you do not consider contact to be in your son's best interest and the answer is therefore that unless contact can be agreed, your former partner will have no choice other than to apply to the Court.

That then moves us onto the question of whether or not the court would make a Contact Order. It is more than likely that the court would order contact. Generally speaking the courts and those professionals that work within the court system relating to children would generally support and uphold a father's right to have contact. They will consider that contact is in the best interest of a child because in that way a child can get to know both sides of his family.

However, there are obviously factors that work against this which the Courts have to take into account when assessing matters relating to the children. These are found in the opening part of the Children Act of 1989.

The court will have to take into account as to what qualities if any your former partner can offer. In your particular case your ex partner has obviously shown a distinct lack of consistency. Whilst you do not tell me for what kind of offence your former partner has been in prison for he is obviously a persistent offender and again that might well work against him. The fact that the contact has hardly ever taken place and that your former partner has shown little or no interest in your son will be a big factor that the court will have to consider.

This is a matter upon which you should take specialist advice. Your former partner may also wish to consult with a solicitor and then the matter could perhaps be dealt with by agreement.

If you are working over 16 hours a week in all probability the best benefit for you to receive will be Working Families Tax Credit (WFTC). This is a relatively new form of assistance paid in the form of a Tax Credit usually directly into your wages. It assists single parents where they have part-time earnings over 16 hours a week. In basic terms, regulations already lay down the set figure that someone in your position with three children should be receiving each week. Your earnings are then deducted from that figure and you are paid the balance by way of WFTC. In actual fact there is a further calculation within those figures but in basic terms that is how it works.

The major benefit of WFTC however, is that unlike benefits before it, and specifically unlike Income Support, the only thing that is taken into account when assessing your eligibility for WFTC is your wages. This means that in addition to your wages and your WFTC you will also be entitled to receive, and not suffer any deduction for your child benefit and most importantly the maintenance. Therefore your income will be made up of four elements namely your wages, WFTC, child benefit and maintenance.

The whole intention of the WFTC is to ensure that nobody should be better off in receipt of Income Support as opposed to WFTC.

Whilst you will not under this type of assistance receive any help towards your mortgage payments you should still find that you are better off than in receipt of Income Support.

A clean break basically means that once you have sorted out the finances (i.e. transferred property, paid any lump sum etc.) that neither of you will have any further claims against each other in the future. This would mean that your wife would not be able to claim against you for maintenance for herself, capital or against your pension or property in the future. It also works the other way round as far as your claims against your wife are concerned. It would also be usual to include a provision that neither of you would be able to make any claims against the other's estate on death. Otherwise under certain circumstances, a former spouse can make a claim against their deceased former spouse's estate under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependents) Act. It should be mentioned that a clean break does not affect your responsibility to continue to maintain any children. If you were to die whilst you were continuing to maintain your children, your children would have a potential claim against your estate.
This is a matter upon which you need specialist legal advice.

Yes, you are. The child is only voluntarily accommodated and she is not the subject at any kind of care proceedings or any kind of Protection Orders. That said, if the Local Authority have concerns as to your daughter's well being, if she were to be returned to you, then, they can apply straight away for an Emergency Protection Order which they could even obtain without telling you and only serve you with the Order once they have obtained it. However, that only lasts for 8 days and they would thereafter have to apply for an interim care order.

Therefore, in basic terms, you are perfectly entitled to collect you daughter. The Local Authority cannot prevent this except if they apply to the Court for an Order seeking to take the child into their care on a legal basis.

This is a matter upon which you certainly need specialist legal advice. It is also a matter where co-operation with the Local Authority will be a necessity.

There are no hard and fast rules as to what is reasonable and what is not reasonable by way of contact arrangements. It very much depends upon what is reasonable between the parties themselves and their own ability to be reasonable to each other and most importantly to your son. Such problems are always intensified when you are dealing with a young baby. You would be quite clearly reluctant to allow contact away from yourself at this point in time. I think that is reasonable. Until your son reaches 12 or 15 months of age, I think it is reasonable that you should continue to offer contact within your home to the father. You can of course make yourself increasingly absent from the room whilst this contact is taking place and you can encourage father to join in with fatherly tasks such as changing his son's nappy, bathing him and at appropriate times feeding him.

However, you must recognise that times move on. You should try to work together so that eventually contact evolves into something better than that. The important thing is to lay the foundations now for later. The more contact the father has with your son now, the easier it will be for both of you and most importantly for the baby when the contact has to be something better than this.

As to frequency of contact I would say for father to come round every night must be very off putting for you and is certainly over burdensome. I would suggest that such contact, perhaps for a couple of hours each week might well be reasonable at this time. It is a question of finding the right level.

It is a matter on which a solicitor could offer valuable help as to your rights and obligations.

The first thing is that you should immediately seek legal advice from a solicitor who is a member of the Law Society's Children Panel. You will need expert legal help and assistance in dealing with the matter. Such proceedings are complicated and can be extremely distressing for all involved.

As to the difference between a Care Order and a Supervision Order there are several noticeable differences.

Where a Care Order is made in respect of a child, the Local Authority share Parental Responsibility with any other persons who already have Parental Responsibility such as a husband and wife. The Local Authority however, are the dominant partner and they will be able to direct as to where a child lives under the terms of the Care Order. You might understand this as the concept of a child being taken into care. With a Supervision Order this does not occur. It is a way of the Local Authority to be involved with the child. It gives the Local Authority powers and duties in respect of a child. It enables them to ensure that the welfare of a child is being properly met but it does not involve the removal of the child.

The second major difference is that the Supervision Order is only made for a period of six months whereas a Care Order remains in place until either the child attains the age of majority or the Care Order is discharged for any reason.

Supervision Orders are made less often than Care Orders, but can be a useful and helpful alternative to Care Orders.

Provided that you are working more than 16 hours per week, you should be entitled to claim the benefit known as Working Families Tax Credit. This has replaced the benefit that was formerly known as Family Credit. There are a number of distinct advantages to Working Families Tax Credit as opposed to Family Credit. One major advantage is that you will now get to keep the maintenance payment paid by your former husband. In fact, there should be four elements to your income now. Firstly, there will be your wages. Secondly, there will then be your Working Families Tax Credit entitlement which is worked out through a very simple formula by taking into account how many children you have, their ages and what your income is. The third element to your income will be the maintenance that you receive from your former husband. You will be entitled to receive that in full without any deductions. The last part of your income will be Child Benefit and again you will receive the full payment of Child Benefit and it is not deducted from your Working Families Tax Credit entitlement. If you receive any Housing Benefit you will need to have this reassessed but you can still be entitled to Housing Benefit even if you receive Working Families Tax Credit. The new benefit is designed so as to ensure that nobody should be worse off by working and claiming Working Families Tax Credit.

You need advice about applying for a Non Molestation Order and Occupation Order against your husband (what you may have heard of as an Injunction) The first hurdle is to obtain Community Legal Service Funding if you are financially eligible. If you wish to apply for this, you will need to show that the police have been called and have been unable to assist you. You also need to show that your solicitor has written to your husband and this did not alleviate the situation or alternatively, that it would not be appropriate in the circumstances to write to him (for example, for fear of further violence). If you can obtain CLS funding, or are prepared to pay privately, you can apply for a Non Molestation Order to stop him from being violent towards you and harassing you. You can also apply for an Occupation Order to remove your husband from the property and allow you and the children to live there. Obviously the judge makes the decision at the end of the day as to whether he will grant either or both of these orders.

You will then perhaps need to take advice regarding divorce proceedings (if you are so minded) and regarding the transfer of the property into your name, depending on the financial circumstances of the marriage and other factors.

The birth certificate is a document that cannot be changed. Assuming that your ex-partner did not obtain parental responsibility for your daughter, then there is nothing to stop you drawing up a change of name deed to change her name now. In some circumstances, if he found out about this he could apply to the Court for an Order that it be changed back. The Court would listen to your arguments. From his point of view it would take into account the reasons for registration in his name in the first place and the need for recognition of the biological link between your daughter and her father. Her welfare however, would be the most important factor. If he has parental responsibility then you would need his written consent or the leave of the Court. You cannot however ever change the birth certificate.

There is only one ground for divorce and that is that the marriage has broken down irretrievably. That irretrievable breakdown has to be supported by one of five evidential grounds. Those grounds are, adultery, unreasonable behaviour, two years desertion, two years separation with both sides giving their consent to the divorce or five years separation.

I have some difficulty in understanding why when you have been separated for 22 months, your husband would wish to start a divorce on the adultery ground. If you are willing to give your consent to a divorce after you have been separated for two years, then it may be better for you to indicate to your husband that you would not wish for the divorce to go ahead on the adultery ground but instead if you were to wait a further two months and divorce on the more amicable ground of you both giving your consent to a separation after two years.

So far as the adultery petition is concerned, this is very difficult for your husband to prove. There is no requirement upon you to admit adultery, (even though you say you haven't) it is then for your husband to prove that you have. The usual way in which adultery is proved is by the other party admitting to it. If the other party is not prepared to admit then an adultery petition would be in some difficulties and most probably would not be able to proceed.

You are correct in that you both share Parental Responsibility. That is a description of the rights and responsibilities that a parent, or a person with a Residence Order has over a child. That Parental Responsibility continues to govern as to what will happen after the death of a child. I suspect that there are no legal precedents for this situation but as you were the grandmother with a Residence Order in your favour, it seems logical that you are the one who should then make the arrangements at this sad time. You will appreciate that her father has full rights to attend her funeral, but in respect of the actual arrangements only one person can be involved and it seems logical that it should be you.