London Family Solicitor

Part One of this series of articles provided an overview concerning the work of the Child Maintenance Service (CMS). This government institution is equipped to handle the vast majority of child maintenance matters and was created with the express purpose of limiting the involvement of the Family Court. There are limitations, however, to what the CMS can accomplish. In this article, we shall examine the child maintenance arrangements which the Family Court is able to impose by virtue of Schedule One of the Children Act 1989.

Whatever their marital status, parents have a responsibility to provide for their children financially. At times, steps need to be taken to ensure that a parent meets this obligation; particularly where one parent does not reside with their child and is not managing their day-to-day care. In most cases, recourse to the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) will be sufficient to ensure the appropriate amount of maintenance is paid.

Background
On the 8th of February 2017, the Supreme Court passed judgment in favour of cohabitant Denise Brewster, concluding that NILGOSC’s* decision not to award her a survivor’s pension; following the unexpected death of her fiancée, was unlawful.