Family Law and Family Reconciliation Issues - Essay Example

? Family Law July 30, Family Law focuses on the children’s and the spouse’s welfare. The research delves into the family law provisions on divorce. The research includes inheritance issues. Family Law guides family reconciliation issues. QUESTION ONE: Legal position in this case. Alan is correct. The shared residence order states that both parents have equal rights for their children. Alan has the right to have his children live with him equally with his wife’s right for the children to live with her. U.K.’s family section 8(1) of the Children Act 1989 states that the children must live 50 percent of the growing up with one parent1. Consequently, the children will live the remaining 50 percent of their children years with the other spouse. The essence of the shared residence rule prevents the issue that one parent is better than the other parent. This was the ruling in the D v D (Shared Residence Order case) 2001 1 Flr 4952. The shared residence complies with section 1 of the Children Act of 1989. The section emphasises that the children’s welfare is paramount compared over the welfare of either of the parents. Each parent has equal time rights and decision rights to the development of the children. The Children’s Act of 1989 is grounded on the Law Commission 1986 Working Paper no. 96. The law ensures that both parents are not denied their right to make equal decisions on the children’s schooling, abode, and other related family decisions3. Children’s Minister Tim Loughton stated that the state had the duty to ensure the fathers are not eliminated from the child development equation. The fathers have the right have the children live with the father on equal basis, removing the issue of discrimination. In fact, Mr. Loughton stated that the move was to reverse the current United Kingdom scene where children were not given their right to personally feel their fathers’ love, affection, and caresses. Further, the ministerial group focuses on increasing the father’s presence in the children’s lives, after a divorce. The ministerial group eagerly plans to amend the Children’s Act of 1989. The fathers are entitled to “shared parenting”. Presently, the courts have entitled the mothers to take care of the children’s growing up. Consequently, most of the children were refused their right to share time with their fathers. The judge referred to the case T v T judgment stating that court should bring the greatest benefits of the children. The court should never prevent dividing the children’s rights and the father’s right to have 50 percent of the children’s time say with the father4. In terms of case law, A v B Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 285 (14 March 2012) states the court of appeals granted the father’s request to contact his child. The child was living with the spouse’s divorced wife. The wife was a lesbian5. The case states the decision is based on what is best for the children’s interest. The child’s interest includes the child’s need for the father to contribute to the child’s nurturing. The father complainant complies with all the legal requirements of a father role. Consequently, the father prays that the court grant his right to be with his child. The court decision states that the father should be granted his right to implement his father image. Specifically, the court can enhance his father –children relationship. The relationship includes providing for the food, clothing, shelter, school, medical, and other real life father responsibilities. By filing a complaint with the court, the court interprets the father’s complaint is convincing proof that the father is serious in his desire to fulfil his right to act as the child’s father. Eric must not get in the way of preventing the father’s right to have the children live with the parent. In the same way, Eric should not prevent the children’s right to stay with the father. By forcing Belinda to North of England, Eric can be charged for preventing the “stay with child” right of both the father and the child. To prevent the being guilty, Eric can stay ALONE in North of England. In addition, Eric can travel from Belinda’s original home county to work. For the sake of love Eric must prove his love for Belinda. Eric can find a way to resolve the issue of living far away from Belinda. There is a saying that states a long absence makes the love grow fonder. This is very true in the current Case. By separately from Belinda, Eric proves that his love for Belinda is true. In the same light, Belinda can show proof that she loves Eric by continuing their love flame burning brightly and intensely during her temporary separation from Eric, who is living in far away Northern England. QUESTION TWO a) Discussion of Greg’s liability to support Harry financially. In terms of Greg’s current weekly salary, Greg must comply with Fiona’s request. Case states that both Fiona and Greg AGREED to have a test tube baby. Both spouses attended all fertility treatment. Both spouses agreed to have Fiona’s embryo creation with her egg impregnated with the sperm of another sperm donor. This clearly shows that Greg is the father of the child. Consequently, Greg should comply with his child maintenance responsibility. Thus, Greg is the father of the child because he agreed with the fertility treatments. Section 2a... states the parent, Greg, shall have parental RESPONSIBILITY for the child, in compliance with section 43 of the Human Fertilization and Embryology Act 20086. The issue of Greg earning only ?500 per week salary is not the major issue. Greg can find a job that pays higher salary in order to increase his financial support for Harry’s financial needs. Further, section 9 (1) (b) of the U.K. family Act of 1996 states that the courts can mediate to ensure successful parental financial arrangements. The court can legally force Greg to allocate a part of his current and future salaries for the financial needs of the child. The court mediates in order to make both Greg and Fiona come up with amicable child support financial agreement and time agreement7. One related legal source is RE B (a child) and Re (Children) CA 25.08.06. The case indicates the United Kingdom reiterates the importance of the open nature of the family justice system. Lord Justice Wall referred to Re) [2004] 1 FLR 1258 emphasising the U.K. courts prioritise the contact between both parents and the child, after divorce or separation, should not be violated. The courts must ensure that both parents take full responsibility for the financial, love, and other needs of their growing children. The courts are entitled to impose penalties on parents who do not fill their responsibilities8. Another relevant source is S v Children’s Reporter – Edinburgh Sheriff Court, 30 May 2008. The case emphasised that the appellant filed in the Sheriff Court’s court against the child’s mother to grant the father’s rights to contact the child. The father based his complaint on Section 11 of the 1995 Act. The section declares the paternity rights. The rights include ensuring awarding the father his rights and responsibilities should not be violated. The Appellant father insists that he was a relevant and rightful father under Section 3(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998. Likewise, the appellant father insists he should be allowed his paternity rights under Article 6 and Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The court Sheriff concluded that father SHOULD be granted his paternity rights to contact the child under Section 1 (1) (c) of the 1995 Act. The section states the father has the legal right to maintain personal relationship as well as direct contact with the children on a regular basis. The law clearly shows that contact includes dividing the children’s growing up years on equal or 50 percent basis. Equivalent parental rights appear in Section 2(1) (c) of the same Act. Additionally, the father can rightfully base his paternal rights to contact and maintain a growing up relationship with his child is grounded on Section 93(2) (b) which focuses on the both parents’ unavoidable child support responsibilities9. However, the law states that if the father may lose his rights to implement his paternal responsibilities if the parent’s does not have enough salary or income. However, the law does not prevent the parent from finding a job or income that will increase one’s salary or income. Thus, Greg must strive to look for additional income or salary in order to comply with his legal paternity rights. The father must also spend one half of the child’s growing up years as required in the above case, A v B Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 285. Greg must exert additional efforts to fill the child’s growing up needs. Greg’s current stance of evading his legal responsibility must be legally resolved by the court. b) Greg’s position if Greg earned ?3000 per week. Similarly, the same position crops up if Greg earned the higher ?3,000. But this time, Greg will have better financial prospects of complying with his paternity responsibility. The court will favourably grant the mother’s request that Greg fill his legal responsibility to pay for the financial needs of the growing child. Very clearly, the law does not give the father, Greg, a choice to pay or not to pay for the child’s developing years’ expenses. The law requires, which is mandatory, that the parents MUST comply with their responsibility to perform their legal child-rearing responsibilities. With the higher salary, Greg has to allocate a higher weekly budget to the child. Court can implement the decision that Greg must allocate a certain percentage of his higher salary to the child’s welfare and development. Greg must also spend 50 percent of his time with the child as described in the above case, A v B Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 285. QUESTION THREE Detailed explanation of what will happen to Ian’s property. As a background, the case does not mention if the spouses are married, entered in a civil partnership, or are simply just living together without a marriage or civil partnership. Consequently, there two aspects of resolving the issue. First, if the spouses are not married or in a civil partnership. The Inheritance law states that if the there is no spouse or civil partner occurrence. Consequently, the inheritance shall be divided among the children on equal terms10. For example, if the deceased person has two children, the entire ?300,000 will be divided among the two children. Each child will receive ? 150,000 each. If Jane and Ian are not married, Jane cannot appeal the U.K. courts to grant her 50 percent or any portion of the deceased person’s entire estate. Clearly, the entire estate will legally pass to the child, Karl, of the deceased person on equal basis, if marriage or civil partnership is absent excluding Jane in the inheritance distribution. This applies to the current Ian inheritance case (http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/cto/customerguide/page14-5.htm). Jane will not receive a single pound from the deceased husband’s inheritance. Jane has no recourse but to accept the inheritance law’s provisions. Jane cannot force the child, Karl, from turning over 50 percent or any portion of the deceased person’s properties to Jane. However, Jane is also not legally prevented from requesting child to give her a certain portion of the inheritance. If this happens, then the transfer from the child’s inheritance to the wife is classified as a gift. The child gives his mother an inheritance gift. The gift falls under other law provisions, not inheritance provisions. In order to receive a 50 percent inheritance share, Jane must prove the deceased spouses’ entered into a marital or civil partnership agreement. Since the husband did not write a will, Jane can show several evidences to prove they are married or civil partners. For, espouse will only receive her 50 percent inheritance share if Jane is not just living together out of wedlock or civil partnership. The child has the legal right to automatically receive all the entire inheritance, without appeal11. Similarly, the wife will not receive a single pound from her deceased husband’s ? 10,000 share of the spouses’ ? 20,000 deposit. The wife will have to transfer the ?10,000 amount to her lone child, Karl. The above case, In the case of Iqbal v Ahmed [2011] EWCA Civ 900, proves that the legal spouse will receive the deceased person’s estate. In addition, the case also states that the live in partner does not receive a single pound from the inheritance. Thus, there is no question that the case veers towards Jane forcing the marriage issue prior to Ian’s death. Case result if Ian and Jane are married. In terms of laying the basis for resolving the issue, the spouse is entitled to a portion of the deceased partner’s properties. Initially, Jane should have ensured that they got married or entered into a civil relationship. The marriage will give her more rights. The law ensures that the rightful spouse will receive 50 percent of the inheritance property. However, Jane did not force the marriage issue. On the other hand, the surviving spouse gets the chattels. Likewise, the surviving will receive a ?250,000 statutory legacy. The lone child will receive the remaining fifty percent of the entire inheritance. In the case of Iqbal v Ahmed [2011] EWCA Civ 900, the spouse had a child. The judge mentioned that the inheritance law ensures the child will receive 50 percent of the entire inheritance. The wife will receive the other 50 percent of the deceased spouse’s inheritance12. In the case of Jane, a married Jane will receive 50 percent of the ?300,000 house. Jane will receive ?200,000 from the sale of the house, if the house is sold at ?400,000. Next, the only child, Karl, will receive the remainder of the cash received for selling the ?300,000 house for ? 400,000. The child will also receive the similar ?200,000. Furthermore, the court’s Lord ruled that the practical consideration is that the provision of a share in the deceased persons’ capital will give the surviving spouse a capital cushion. Likewise, Lord Nichols mentioned the word of a capital share in the property to the widow, in the circumstances of the case is appropriate. Further, the Lord stated that the best alternative was to sell the family home and divide the cash equally between the surviving spouse and the child. The selling of the house was a better alternative compared to both the surviving spouse and the child living under unfriendly terms in one home. Since Jane is married, Jane will legally receive 50 percent of the deceased husband’s bank deposit. Jane will receive ? 5,000. Consequently, the child, Karl, will receive ? 5,000 from the ? 10,000 bank deposit. If there are five children, the ? 5,000 will be divided among the five children. Each of the five children will receive ? 1,000 each. QUESTION FOUR There are two alternatives to Mike’s possible filing for a divorce and financial position. First, Mike can file for a divorce. One of the grounds for divorce is the marital relationship can not be repaired. Mike can show evidence in court that Lisa is having sexual relationship with Mike’s friend. Adultery is one of the grounds for successful divorce proceedings. Mike can show proof of adultery by submitting a statement of details of the adultery13. Applying the same case, A v B Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 285 (14 March 2012), Mike should comply with his paternal responsibility. Mike should allocate a monthly budget for the financial expenses of the three children. Mike has the right to leave the matrimonial home. The wife’s adultery is one of the causes for divorce. In fact, Mike should immediately file for divorce proceedings. However, the children have their rights. The children have a right to the fulfilment of section 1 of the Children Act of 1989. Mike must not evade the children’s right to ensure the children’s welfare is not violated. Each parent, included Mike, has must be present in the children’s developing. The husband should allocated 50 percent of the children’s time staying with the children. The children should live with the wife for 50 percent of the children’s time. Likewise, Mike must make an arrangement where he will let the children stay with Mike during certain times of the month. Consequently, the Children’s Act of 1989 and the Law Commission 1986 Working Paper no. 96 reiterates the both parents should not avoid their parental duties, at all cost. The wife can legally force Mike to stay with the children for 50 percent of the children’s time14. Children’s Minister Tim Loughton’s family law statements include Mike should not run away from his paternal financial responsibilities. Mike should comply with the children’s right to feel the father’s love and care, during their growing up years. Mike’s refusing to comply with his financial responsibility can be described as a discriminatory act. The wife should not be left to fend for the child’s financial needs and welfare hours. In fact, Mr. Loughton does not exempt from Mike from his responsibilities. Mike must shower the triplets with lots of fathers’ love, affection, and caresses. The divorce law prohibits parental responsibility. The U.K. Law Commission states that statistics have shown that U.K. divorces are normal occurrence. Similarly, the statistic shows that a lifelong marriage is difficult to keep. There are many acts that will trigger legal divorce. One of the divorce resources is adultery. Mike’s uncovering his wife in the arms of his best friend has its divorce repercussions. U.K. divorce cropped up only in 1857. With divorce increasing, morally issues are considered as factors that increase divorces. For example, moral issues may trigger divorce issues. Having a relationship with Mike’s best friend can be classified as a morally unethical issue, triggering the divorce15. Second, Mike can postpone the possible divorce plans. Instead, Mike can try to mend his marriage. For Mike, all is not lost. Mike can choose to try to save the marriage. Both spouses can attend a marriage counsellor. The counsellor will open up the reason for his wife’s turning off her love for Mike. The counsellor may frankly inform Mike that his high salary is the cause of the marriage breakdown. Mike’s busy work schedule may be the cause of his wife’s looking for someone to spend quality love time with her. To save the marriage, Mike can win back his wife’s love. Mike’s failure to spend quality love with Lisa should not be met with leaving Lisa and the children without financial and other fatherly responsibilities. Based on the legal facts, Mike’s successful career in the property development market segment generates a huge ?750,000 annual salary. However, his marriage stood to suffer from his successful real estate career. The family law Act 1996 states that troubled marriages can go three alternative ways. One way is for marriage to end in divorce. The other way is a possible mending of a marriage that is on the rocks. Section 3(1) (1) states that divorce can be granted if the marriage is irretrievably broken. Likewise, Mike can file for a separation. A third way is separation. Separation occurs in Section 4 of the Family Law Act 1996. If Mike files for a divorce, Lisa can also prevent the marriage from breaking down. Section 10 of the Family Law Act 1996 states that Lisa can prevent the divorce from unfolding. The same section states that the divorce cancellation occurs when one of the parties, Lisa, will financially suffer from the implementation of the divorce. Mike’s divorce actions can also be denied if the children can show that they will financially suffer from the divorce. Likewise, Lisa can request that the divorce be cancelled on the ground that Lisa is not having an affair with Mike’s best friend16. Analysing the above information, Family Law scrutinizes the children’s and the spouse’s welfare. The divorce should comply with family law provisions. Inheritance is governed by relevant laws. Evidently, Family Law ensures all family reconciliation issues are legally resolved. REFERENCES: Casecheck, viewed July 30, 2012 from Casecheck, viewed July 30, 2012, from < http://www.casecheck.co.uk/CaseLaw/tabid/1184/EntryId/11293/Default.aspx.> Casecheck. Viewed July 30, 2012, from < http://www.casecheck.co.uk/CaseLaw/tabid/1184/EntryId/18073/Default.aspx.> England and Wales Court of Appeal Decisons, viewed July 30, 2012, from England and Wales Court of Appeal Decisons, viewed July 30, 2012, from < http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/other/EWLC/1966/6.html&query=divorce&method=boolean.> England and Wales Court of Appeal Decisons, viewed July 30, 2012 from Family Law Act 1996, viewed July 30, 2012, from < http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/27/part/II.> Family Law act 1996. viewed July 30, 2012 from Family Law Act 1996, viewed July 30, 2012 from < http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41.> Families link. Viewed July 30, 2012 from < http://www.familieslink.co.uk/pages/law_ukcases_dvd.htm.> Guardian. Viewed July 30, 2102, from HMRC, viewed July 30, 2012, from Justice, viewed July 30, 2012, from Understanding Grounds for Divorce, viewed July 30, 2012, from . Read More