Wed08232017

Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Family Law Journal: June 2016

Joanne Hall looks at service outside the jurisdiction and the impact of the digital age

Technology undoubtedly reigns supreme in our time. Our moments and thoughts are stored in a virtual cloud and e-mail and advancing smartphone technologies dominate our lives. In Maughan v Wilmot [2016] Mostyn J encouraged lawyers to engage with the realities of technology and globalisation, and to recognise their impact on legal practice.

Amy Harris examines the factors that will be considered by the courts on an application for the internal relocation of a child

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Re C (Internal Relocation) [2015] is essential reading for practitioners and provides a helpful re-examination of the issues that affect the court’s decision-making process in relation to the external and internal relocation of children. The judgment helpfully summarises how the historical approach to internal relocation has clashed with the principles associated with external relocation, but has also at times been complementary to them.

Max Lewis reflects on the impact of Sharland and Gohil and outlines the key points applied by the court in AB v CD

It is unclear whether Richard Nixon knew in advance that people connected with his re-election campaign broke into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in June 1972. What brought him down was his involvement in the cover-up that immediately followed. As the present US presidential campaign continues to heat up, the moral of that sorry tale continues to reassert itself within UK matrimonial finance litigation.

Withers LLP

Suzanne Kingston and Natalie O’Shea highlight the new children arbitration scheme and analyse the impact of the post-arbitration decision in DB v DLJ

The children arbitration scheme, approved by the Institute of Family Law Arbitrators (IFLA), will be launched in July 2016. In many ways, the children arbitration scheme shares many of the benefits and advantages already familiar from the financial arbitration scheme. The most exciting aspect, perhaps, is the opportunity for parents to dictate the pace of the process itself, in order to meet the specific needs of children and their family in a way that the court system simply cannot do. Time-critical decisions have become increasingly difficult to obtain from our over-burdened court system. Issues concerning education, with looming deadlines for school entrance applications, and arrangements for holidays and Christmas require fast adjudication. In other cases, sensitivity and time is needed to allow children and the family to adjust to changing circumstances, such that they are emotionally and practically ready for the next steps. The children arbitration scheme is specifically designed to allow parents to press on the accelerator, or brake, as and when appropriate for their children during the process of separation.

In the first of a two-part consideration, Katherine Illsley and Agata Patyna report on the rights of unaccompanied children seeking asylum within the immigration and family law process

The initial part of this two-part article will consider the problems facing local authorities and unaccompanied children going through the asylum and care process, and whether the system is fit for purpose.

In the conclusion to a two-part analysis on forced and child marriage, Shabina Begum sets out the position in England and Wales and the potential for change

Part one of this article set out the position on early and forced marriages in Bangladesh. This concluding part examines the UK approach to forced marriage, remedies available, and recommendations as to what can be done to further reduce early and forced marriages in both the UK and in Bangladesh.

Emily Watson considers a recent decision on jurisdiction between EU member states involving issues of lis pendens

The decision of Moylan J in E v E [2015] was primarily concerned with a jurisdiction dispute between England and France and the application of Art 19 of Reg (EC) 2201/2003 (Brussels II bis) as to competing proceedings, as well as a subsidiary issue concerning service.