Author: admin

The two questions answered by the case of Standish are when does non-matrimonial property become matrimonial property? And how is the ‘sharing principle’ applied to such property in financial remedy proceedings?  

The factual background, as is often the position in financial remedy cases, that ascend to the Court of Appeal and beyond, relates to a large capital pot and falls firmly into the category of ‘big money cases.’

The Facts 

The parties were married in 2005. The H was 72 and the W was 57 at the date of the appeal. There were two children of the marriage. Both parties were previously married. They separated in 2020. There were substantial assets including the family home valued at £21.6m. The nub of the appeal issue was that H transferred to W, towards the end of the marriage, £77.8m as part of a tax planning scheme. The purpose of the transfer being found to establish a Trust for the benefit of the two children of the marriage. The provenance of those assets were the H’s and were accepted to be non- matrimonial at source. The trial Judge divided the matrimonial property, which included the 2017 monies, 60:40 in the H’s favour to reflect his unmatched capital contribution. The W was awarded £45m.

The Court of Appeal allowed the H’s cross appeal. Held: the 2017 transfer of £77.8m to W did not become matrimonial property and the W’s award was reduced to £25m. The W appealed to the Supreme Court, she maintained that the 2017 transfer was essentially a gift and the COA was in error in failing to recognise this and that it was wrong to conclude that those assets remained non-matrimonial property.

The Principles 

It is important to emphasise that in many cases there is insufficient capital and income to meet needs. In the event that needs are not met by the matrimonial assets, the court will look to non- matrimonial assets to meet those needs and this is principle was established in the cases of S v S [2014] EWHC 4732(Fam); X v C [2022] EWFC 79.  

The Application of the Sharing Principle 

There is a distinction between matrimonial and non-matrimonial property and the application of distinguishing them is the important preliminary exercise in any case.  

Generally, assets which either spouse owned prior to the marriage or they have been gifted or inherited during the course of the marriage are non-matrimonial. These are not subject to the sharing principle (the principles of need and compensation fall within the exceptions).

Assets which have been acquired or earned during the course of the marriage are often regarded as matrimonial in specie and are often referred to as ‘the fruits of the marriage.’

The principle relating to matrimonial assets is that they are subject to the sharing principle and the starting point may be equal sharing but this does not necessarily follow and is subject to the facts.

Finally, the principle of matrimonialisation may apply to assets and this is where an asset has started off life as non-matrimonial but during the course of the marriage has become a marital asset by virtue of its treatment, this is subject to degree. The Supreme Court made plain the following:  

1. The concept of matrimonialisation should not be treated narrowly [52]:

‘ …what is important … is to consider how the parties have been dealing with the asset and whether this shows that, over time, they have been treating the asset as shared between them. ‘ 

1. The sharing principle must be ‘tied back’ to seeking a fair outcome. [54]

iii. The pragmatic exercise of assessing whether the matrimonial property is so much greater than the non- matrimonial property that:

….. it is unfair to the parties- to try to work out what percentage was nonmatrimonial. Fairness (in saving needless expense) demands that one should instead simply treat it all as matrimonial property.’ [55]

1. The transfer of property into the name of one or both of the parties to the marriage did not render the asset matrimonialised. [56]

Tina Harrington 

Georgia Taylor (Mini Pupil) 

Trinity Chambers July 2025

A Brief Overview

When individuals, (whether with members of their family, friends, partners or business partners) own land or property together, disagreements can arise leading to legal disputes.

Those disputes can result from the use of the land or property including the occupation; the ownership (interest) of the land or property;  or whether it should be sold.

In the event of sale there can be disputes over the conditions of sale, the division of the proceeds of sale and whether there should be adjustments to the sale proceeds due to unequal financial contributions .

What does the Act do?

This Act provides the court with the following powers:

• To make an order relating to the exercise by a Trustee of their functions;
• To exclude or restrict the Beneficiaries’ entitlement to occupy the land or property;
• To declare the nature of a person’s interest in land or property;
• The court can order a sale of land (or part of it) or property;
• The court can order the land or property to be mortgaged, exchanged or partitioned CPR 40.16-40.17;
• The court can make compensatory (financial) awards

 s .13(6) and S 14(2);

• The court cannot transfer property but in certain circumstances can give one party the first opportunity to bid on a land/ property which is the subject of an order for sale s. 14(2).

What is a Trust of Land?

A Trust of Land is when land or property is owned by 2 or more people. Trustees hold the legal title and the beneficial interest is the right to enjoy occupation of the land or property or receive an income from it, this is shared amongst the Beneficiaries.

A Trust essentially outlines how that land or property is held.  Who owns the land or property; in what shares; what are the rights of the owners and what are their responsibilities and obligations.   This can be set out expressly in an Express Trust or be Implied by the way the land or property was acquired, this is known as an Implied Trust.

Who can apply?

An owner or person with an interest in the property may apply.

What are the considerations?

Under Section 13

Section 13 relates to who can occupy the land or property. One or more of the Beneficiaries rights to occupy can be excluded or restricted. Conditions may be imposed on the Beneficiaries who are in occupation, such as discharging the mortgage or other expenses relating to the land or property. Conditions can be imposed on Beneficiaries to compensate the Beneficiary who has been excluded or whose occupation is restricted.  When determining issues of the court will have regard to:

1. The intention of the person/s who created the Trust;
2. The purpose for which the land or property is held;
3. The circumstances and wishes of each of the beneficiaries who are entitled to occupy the land or property

Under Sections 14 and 15

Section 14 relates to the exercise of the Trustees of their functions and the Court’s declaratory powers as to the nature and extent of a person’s interest in the land or property. The court can order the sale and regulate how the property is to be sold. On sale it can make adjustments to the proceeds to reflect financial contributions.

Section 15 outlines the relevant matters that the court takes into account:

1. The intention of the parties;
2. The purpose for which the land or property is held;
3. The welfare of any minor who occupies or might reasonably be expected to occupy the land or property as his home;
4. Any creditor’s interest in respect of any beneficiary.
5. Section 15 inevitably considers two types of claims:-

In applying the considerations under section 15 the court inevitably considers two types of claim:

Resulting Trusts (where the non-owner makes a financial contribution to the purchase of the land or property); or

Constructive Trusts, where parties have  formed a ‘Common Intention’ that the non-owner will benefit from shared ownership and that the non-owner has acted to his detriment as a consequence.

Further the court can assess property rights of a party through Proprietary Estoppel, where one party relied on the promises of shared ownership from the owners and acted to their detriment on the basis of that promise.

Procedure

It is important to know and understand the procedure. There are very strict rules on the timing of proceedings, the information that must be disclosed and considerations to alternative ways of resolving the dispute. The costs consequences can be very serious for breaches of Court Directions or the CPR. It is noteworthy that the court has the power to order costs on an indemnity basis plus interest as well as an additional amount CPR 44. 3 (1) (2).

It is also important to bear in mind the Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct) noting paragraph 6 requires the claimant to set out concise details of the claim giving the defendant a reasonable time (14 days in most straight forward cases) to respond and para 8 requires the consideration of negotiation or other form of ADR.

Overview

It is important to note that these applications often run alongside applications for financial relief for minor children under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989.

Further there are other potential remedies for an engaged couple, where is it possible to claim a share or an enhanced share of land or property under the Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act 1970 Section 37

The number of TLATA claims is increasing, the area of law can be complicated and there are many ‘trip hazards’ that can cause serious consequences to the outcome in any case. When purchasing land or property or making a financial contribution it is important to protect yourself from litigation. A Declaration of Trust or Ownership Agreement will offer protection and updating any such Trusts or agreements in the event of a change of circumstances.

 In the event of a claim it is important to establish a clear litigation structure in order to achieve the best outcome.

Tina Harrington, Counsel on behalf of Sheryl Perry Solicitors. 

An order under Section 91(14) of The Children Act 1989, also known as a “barring order”, is made by the court in private children act proceedings when the court feels it is necessary to prevent one party from making a further application under the Children Act 1989 (usually Section 8 applications), unless they have first sought permission from the court to make such an application.


The case of Re v P [1999] historically outlines the requirements for an order under Section 91(14), which highlights that the welfare of the child should be balanced against preventing parties unrestricted access to the court. Society has changed somewhat since this case, illustrating a cultural shift whereby Section 91(14) orders are now made more frequently. One of the reasons why the threshold appears to have been lowered in respect of the making of Section 91(14)’s orders, is to prevent the child(ren), or another person, being at risk of suffering harm if further applications were issued. This appears to be an attempt by the court to reduce the applicant in proceedings subjecting the respondent in proceedings to controlling and coercive behaviour, which of course is now recognised as a form of domestic abuse, but in previous years was not. The court are also mindful of preventing meritless applications from consuming court time, which should instead be utilised by genuine applications in need of the courts assistance.


If a Section 91(14) order is made, as stated above, it does not necessarily mean that the
person who is subject to that order cannot make a further application under the children act in the future. What is does mean is that they will need to seek the courts permission before any such application will be issued. In determining whether such an application should be issued, the court will consider whether there has been a material change in the circumstances since the order was made. The applicant will need to demonstrate the change in circumstances to the court with evidence in support.


An application for an order to be made under Section 91(14) can either be via the usual
Form C2 application, or orally at court. The court can also introduce an order under Section 91(14) on its own accord. Practice Direction 12(Q) deals with the procedural requirements for applications of this nature in further detail.
In light of the above, it is important to consider before issuing further applications under the children act, where it is in fact in the child(ren)’s best interest to do so and whether a
further set of proceedings would in fact subject the child(ren) or another person to suffering harm. If you require advise on this complex issue, please do not hesitate contact a member of our team on 01245 408 958.


Summer Croft
Family Law Solicitor
Sheryl Perry Solicitors

While forced marriage has been illegal in the UK since 2014 and ‘love marriages’ are held up as the norm, arranged marriages often fall into a grey area between the two.

Arranged marriages can sometimes be viewed as uncomfortable in contemporary Britain, largely due to the belief that these are the same as ‘forced marriage’ which they are most certainly not. For many they are a quaint eastern custom and now modern arranged marriages involve a variety of matchmaking practices where each family tailors its own version to suit modern western identities and ambitions.

In the first generation of arranged marriages in Britain, people would return to their homeland to find partners, and would expect their children to follow in their footsteps. There was a marked shift in the attitude of the British-born second generation in the 60s/70s and unlike their parents, this generation identified more with Britain than with Asian countries. Today younger British Asians prefer two styles of marriage – a semi-arranged and love-arranged marriage. Regardless, it is still vital to acknowledge the diversity of arranged marriage forms and what it means to the family unit. Love and arrangement can exist together, as shown by the marriage styles that are popular among British Asians today.

The modern arranged marriage is more than simply meeting your soon-to-be spouse on your wedding day for the very first time. Today, there is often significant negotiation between matched couples and their families. 

However, an arranged marriage is not a guarantee of a happy or successful marriage.

The divorce process is a stressful time for all individuals regardless of culture and tradition. No matter whether your divorce journey is contentious or amicable, you will be expected to go through your debts, assets, and personal belongings with a fine-toothed comb just as you would with a western divorce process. The one thing that could be hard to navigate in an arranged marriage is the provision of a dowry.

• The Asian dowry tradition in England is more prevalent amongst the Sikh community. 

• The Gujarati community sees it as an exception rather than the rule. 

• In the Muslim community the bridegroom’s family provide gifts for the bride that are not usually reciprocated. 

• Historically, most Asians enjoyed a high standard of living, irrespective of their caste and religion, and could afford to give a dowry. In Britain today, the rising standard of living coupled with Asians’ desire to advance in their community, the dowry has remained intact.

Upon divorce, the dowry may be called into question and the legal framework often requires the English courts to adjudicate on contentious issues such as: 

• Did a bride take a dowry with her?

• What is the legal effect of the dowry?

• How does a bride get her dowry back? 

• What is the legal effect of jewellery passing from the bridegroom’s family to the bride? 

• What is the legal effect of jewellery and/or clothing which passed from the bride’s family for the groom and his family? 

This is an area of arranged marriage divorce that requires much evidence and needs the knowledge and expertise of an experienced family law solicitor. 

Here at Sheryl Perry Solicitors, we are competent and compassionate and will help guide you through this difficult time. We understand that each legal separation is unique and requires a personally tailored approach. If you are considering or currently experiencing divorce in an arranged marriage, please contact us today to arrange a free telephone discussion to find out how we can help.

These new changes come into effect on 6 April 2023, but what could it mean for you?

The aim of this new measure is to make the Capital Gains Tax rules that apply to separating or divorcing spouses/civil partners fairer by allowing more time to transfer assets between themselves without being subjected to Capital Gains Tax within that specific tax year.

Other special rules can also be applied to couples who have maintained a financial interest in their former home at the point of sale.

This change comes about following a second report by The Office of Tax Simplification (OTS) [1] which looked at how Capital Gains Tax rules apply to individuals who separate/divorce and it was recommended that the government should extend the ‘no gain no loss’ window on separation. The government’s response in November 2021 agreed that the ‘no gain no loss’ window on separation and divorce should be extended.

This new legislation will be introduced in Spring Finance Bill 2023 and will allow: 

• Separating spouses or civil partners be given up to three years after the year they cease to live together in which to make no gain/no loss transfers.

• No gain/no loss treatment will also apply to assets that separating spouses or civil partners transfer between themselves as part of a formal divorce agreement.

• A spouse or civil partner who retains an interest in the former matrimonial home be given an option to claim private residence relief (PRR) when it is sold.

• Individuals who have transferred their interest in the former matrimonial home to their ex-spouse or civil partner and are entitled to receive a percentage of the proceeds when that home is eventually sold, be able to apply the same tax treatment to those proceeds when received that applied when they transferred their original interest in the home to their ex-spouse or civil partner.

The current rules mean that CGT is charged on a transfer of assets between married/civil couples who have lived together if the division of assets falls outside of tax year of separation or divorce. The new rules mean that couples will now have more flexibility to transfer assets within a longer 3 year time period before CGT is applied. For many, this will be a welcome change meaning there could be more money available to meet the financial needs of individuals and any children from the relationship. 

How will these new rules affect you?

Every couples’ financial situation is unique and it is important to ensure that you seek the right professional advice if you are separating or divorcing and find out how these new rules can affect your Capital Gains Tax liability.

Sheryl Perry Solicitors can offer expert family law advice and guidance around all financial matters relating to your separation or divorce. If you need professional advice, contact us today and make an appointment on 01245 463243 or email sheryl.perry@sherylperrysolicitors.uk 

Source:
[1] Simplifying practical, technical and administrative issues, The Office of Tax Simplification: May 2021

How to turn a negative review into a positive experience.

As a family law solicitor and acting for one party, it’s inevitable that at some point the ‘other’ party we are not representing isn’t going to be happy – especially when we’re doing our job properly and getting the results our client needs, to the frustration of the opposition. The field of law is very much win or lose – sometimes there can be compromise, but essentially it is a highly emotive and stressful time for all parties.

Whilst here at Sheryl Perry Solicitors we try our hardest to manage our cases diplomatically and sensitively, we have come to learn that it’s true what they say: “You can’t please all of the people all of the time!” This has only just come to light in a rather eye-opening way for us. Our glowing 5* reviews have been tainted by a 1* review left by a ‘friend’ of ‘the other party’; it’s not even a valid review from the client who instructed us.

So how has this left us feeling? Apart from being naturally disappointed, this has helped us to reflect on how we handle difficult situations. In this particular case, it has highlighted how we uphold our duty of care to our clients. If other parties decide to go against seeking their own independent legal advice, that is completely out of our control and we should not be targeted with a poor review as a result. If every disgruntled opposing party left a 1* review on their ex-spouse/partner’s representing law firm, there would be no 5* reviews in the legal world.

For us, getting a 1* review was unappreciated and unmotivating, but on reflection we don’t think it wasn’t necessarily a bad thing; it’s given us a little reminder to check that our processes are working well for our clients – and they are.

We know we’ve put the work in and we know that we’ve executed everything expected of us to our reputable high standard. Our first response to this negative feedback could have led us to become quite defensive, but after taking a deep breath, we gave a solid and informative response which we feel has a far greater impact; it shows that we have listened to the reviewer. This has shown us that criticism can be just as constructive as it can be damaging and the choice of response is always firmly in our hands.

This experience has highlighted a few things that we need to think about going forward should something like this ever happen again:

Was there any truth in the bad review?

Even if it is untrue, were there points we can learn from? In this instance the review was from an opposing third party; our duty of care is always towards our client which was fully met.

Do we need to make changes to our onboarding processes to enhance our client experience? 

We have onboarding procedures in place to protect our clients including providing additional support for special needs or disabilities. We cannot be held responsible for any opposing party who refuses to seek their own legal advice nor can we be responsible for any additional support they need. If we did, this would be at the expense of our client which would be unethical.

We won’t take it personally; we’ll just deal with it and respond professionally and with dignity. 

However, if any incident escalates into online abuse, this will be discussed offline and if necessary we will take steps to have any untrue or harmful review removed.

In our sea of positive reviews, the negative one may stand out but it shows the reviewer in their true light and emphasises it is not from our client but the opposition. Our many clients respect and value our professionalism and legal expertise, that’s why they choose us to represent them. Our reviews also show that we are keeping it real.

If you find yourself in need of expert family law advice, Sheryl Perry Solicitors is here to support you. For a free and confidential discussion, please contact us today.

What you need to know about spousal maintenance and why a ‘meal ticket for life’ is something we can no longer expect

What is spousal maintenance?

• Spousal maintenance is the financial amount awarded by the Courts to be paid by the higher-earning spouse to the lower-earning/no income spouse following divorce.

• Spousal maintenance is only awarded if the lower-earning spouse cannot support themselves without any financial contribution from the higher-earning spouse.

• The term of the spousal maintenance agreement can be awarded to a specific period of time, such as life or when retirement occurs and pensions can be drawn.

• If the recipient re-marries then they will lose their right to continue to receive the maintenance payments, but it does not end by simply cohabiting.

The sum fixed for the spousal maintenance payments can be varied at a later date if circumstances have changed and this can only be done through a court order.

It sounds relatively straightforward, however, one interesting case to note is that of Waggott v Waggott [2018] EWCA Civ 727. This particular case involved Karen Waggott who was the ex-wife of William Waggott, the very successful Finance Director of TUI Travel. She had already been awarded a divorce settlement of £9.76m which included a pension on their divorce plus £175,000 per annum for life. Not content with this spousal maintenance sum, she appealed and attempted to bolster her financial award by asking for an increased share of her ex-husband’s bonuses, seeking a variation of the maintenance order worth another £23,000 per annum to her. Her ex-husband cross-appealed on the level of maintenance and the length of time it was payable and he won with the court ordering a non-extendable three-year term. Unfortunately, this landmark case will now be used by family lawyers as a way to obtain a clean break for the higher-earning spouse.

This case shows us that the ‘meal ticket for life’ via the joint lives maintenance order is something that lower-earning spouses can now no longer hope to rely upon from the English court system. This leaves us with the question that for those married couples who have been able to build up a good level of capital, and where an equal split of capital meets each of the couple’s needs but no more, is it right that the lower-earning spouse immediately has to draw down on their capital whereas the higher-earning spouse can avoid doing so as they can rely on a continued and significant income going forward?

Here at Sheryl Perry Solicitors, we can advise on all aspects of spousal maintenance including:

• Finding out if you are entitled to spousal maintenance
• Negotiating any spousal maintenance sum during your divorce proceedings
• Dealing with your application to the family court for spousal maintenance
• Making amendments to your spousal maintenance agreement
• Pursuing non-payment of spousal maintenance

If you feel that you need some professional support and sound legal advice on spousal maintenance, please arrange a FREE informal consultation with Sheryl Perry, our divorce and financial expert. Contact us today and make an appointment on 01245 463243 or email sheryl.perry@sherylperrysolicitors.uk

Why trying to hide your assets is never a good idea

In 2021, Tatiana Akhmedova defeated her son and her ex-husband in The England and Wales Family Court (EWFC) in an asset recovery claim. The court ruled that her eldest son had been involved in helping her former husband, Farkhad Akhmedov, hide his assets to deprive her of £453.6 million – the sum she was legally awarded in their English divorce settlement in December 2016.

Having only received £5m in her settlement payment, and not a penny more, she sued her ex-husband, accusing him of trying to conceal his wealth. Since that point in time, Akhmedova had been trying to locate her ex-husband in order to freeze and gain possession of his assets which had been successfully awarded to her and is the largest settlement ever granted by a UK court to date.

In order to keep his assets away from his ex-wife, Akhmedov transferred the majority of his assets, including his £340 million super-yacht ‘Luna’ and his £110 million art collection into Liechtenstein-based trusts and foundations and other nominee companies in Panama and Cyprus.

During 2015 and 2016, Akhmedov involved their son Temur Akhmedov in depriving Akhmedova further by keeping his assets at a greater distance and transferred his Moscow-based property portfolio to him as well as significant sums of money. He also gave Temur legal authority to transfer assets to other parties.

Previously, Akhmedova had successfully obtained freezing orders against Akhmedov’s assets in Liechtenstein, but the Liechtenstein Constitutional Court later held that the English judgment against the assets was not enforceable. When Akhmedova learned of her son’s involvement, she applied ex parte to EWFC for a worldwide freezing order against him too. This was granted by Mrs Justice Knowles in July 2020.

Temur, who is a UK citizen living in London, maintained that he acted as a “mere go-between” and that the majority of the assets transferred were simply part of his father’s estate planning. Naturally, the EWFC was largely concerned with determining the involvement of Temur and others in the moving and covering up of Akhmedov’s assets. A WhatsApp message disclosed during legal proceedings, stated that Akhmedov told his son “that he would “burn” all of his wealth rather than give it to her”. Temur replied, saying he agreed, adding that she “didn’t deserve” a penny.

However, Mrs Justice Knowles, who had previously granted the worldwide freezing order against Temur and disclosure orders against representatives of some of Akhmedov’s Liechtenstein trusts in 2020, rejected the ruling of the Liechtenstein Constitutional Court and ruled in Akhmedova’s favour.  Knowles stated that Temur was “his father’s lieutenant who has helped his father protect his assets from his mother’s claims and done and said all he could to prevent his mother receiving a penny of the matrimonial assets”. She went on to say that Temur was an “untruthful and unsatisfactory witness who lied in respect of various aspects of his evidence”.

The court ruled that Temur had helped his father hide millions of pounds from his mother after a divorce settlement and was ordered to pay £75 million to her. In Mrs Justice Knowles’ judgement, she ordered Akhmedov, and a number of businesses he had used to hide his wealth, to pay his ex-wife the hundreds of millions of pounds she was owed. Furthermore, Knowles said “the wife has been the victim of a series of schemes designed to put every penny of the husband’s wealth beyond her reach. That strategy was designed to render the wife powerless by ensuring that, if she did not settle her claim for financial relief following their divorce on the husband’s terms, there would be no assets left for her to enforce against.”

The consequences for father and son could be high, as any party in financial remedy proceedings have a duty of full and frank disclosure throughout and if any party fails to comply the court can make a costs order against that party on an indemnity basis.

If you are considering divorce and there are foreign financial assets involved, speak to our divorce specialist, Sheryl Perry and arrange a FREE informal consultation. Contact us today and make an appointment on 01245 463243 or email sheryl.perry@sherylperrysolicitors.uk

If you’ve recently divorced or dissolved your civil partnership, updating your Will should be your top priority – unless of course, you want your ex to inherit?

Many people simply assume that by getting divorced any Will made whilst still married automatically becomes invalid. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case and not making a new Will could lead to serious consequences for your estate.

Divorce doesn’t revoke a Will. Any current Will remains valid, but in terms of any inheritance, your ex is treated as if they had died when your marriage or civil partnership was dissolved. They will no longer be able to benefit from your estate unless you have specifically stated otherwise. They can no longer act on your behalf as Executor or Trustee either.

If your Will hasn’t been updated to reflect your new marital status, you risk your estate being shared differently to how you imagine it would. With your ex’s name being unchanged following divorce, the Rules of Intestacy come into play and this means that whatever your ex was going inherit would then be passed on to your next beneficiary.  If you don’t update your Will after divorce, your estate could be treated as if you never had a Will at all. In these circumstances, the courts will decide which relatives will inherit from you in strict order of priority. This is something that you may not want to happen and it could certainly jeopardise any inheritance you’ve got planned for the rest of your family especially for new partners or other dependants.

What happens if we are just separated but still legally married? Can I exclude my spouse from my Will?

Yes. You can leave your estate to whoever you want to. If you separate, but are still legally married, then your Will remains valid and your spouse will be entitled to inherit as set out in the terms of the Will. If you don’t want your spouse to inherit, but you are not legally divorced, then it’s important to write a new Will stipulating your new wishes and it would be wise to inform your executors in case your spouse decides to make a claim under the Inheritance Act.

What happens to my old Will if I remarry?

Should you remarry after divorce, any existing Will you had in place will be revoked altogether unless you wish otherwise – which is rare! If you don’t make a new Will and you die,

then your estate will be dealt with by the Rules of Intestacy as mentioned above, leaving your new spouse unprotected.

Here at Sheryl Perry Solicitors we are experts in getting you the divorce you need, but we don’t just leave it there. We want you and your family to be as protected as possible and that’s why we when we undertake a divorce on your behalf, we sever any tenancy to ensure your ex cannot benefit by survivorship, only through a valid Will. We also have the added expertise of partnering with Sovereign Wills and Estate Planning to ensure that your Will reflects your wishes in the next stage of your life.

If you are considering divorce or just starting proceedings, we are here to help and welcome you to arrange a FREE informal consultation with Sheryl Perry, our divorce expert and/or Sue Byrne from Sovereign Wills and Estate Planning to protect your estate and your beneficiaries. 

Contact us today and make an appointment on 01245 463243 or email sheryl.perry@sherylperrysolicitors.uk

To contact Sue Byrne at Sovereign Wills and Estate Planning call 01245 460383 or email sue@sovereignestateplanning.co.uk

Whilst a biological mother is automatically granted parental responsibility, that is not the case for the father or civil parent. In this blog we explain all you need to know about parental responsibility and what you need to do to get it. 

Mum + Dad/civil parent = child = equal parental responsibility, yes? No. Unfortunately, it isn’t that simple. Firstly, let’s look at what parental responsibility is.

Parental Responsibility is defined in s 3(1) Children Act 1989 as being:

“all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his property.” ‘Parental Responsibility’ focuses more on the parent’s duties towards the child rather than the parent’s rights over the child.

But how does that translate into everyday life?

During a child’s upbringing there are certain decisions that need to be made and the person(s) with parental responsibility is allowed to have a say in that decision. These decisions include:

• determining the child’s education and where they go to school
• choosing, registering or changing the child’s name
• appointing a child’s guardian in the event of the death of a parent
• consenting to a child’s medical treatment/surgery
• accessing a child’s medical records
• consenting to taking the child abroad for holidays or extended stays
• representing the child in legal proceedings
• determining the religion of the child. Mixed cultural backgrounds should include exposure to both religions of those with parental responsibility, until the child is of an age where they can make their own religious choices.

Who has Parental Responsibility?

Biological mothers automatically DO have Parental Responsibility.

Fathers who are NOT married to or in a civil partnership with the mother DO NOT automatically have Parental Responsibility.

Fathers who are married or in a civil partnership with the mother DO automatically have Parental Responsibility and even if Mum and Dad divorce or the civil partnership is dissolved, parental responsibility remains intact.

Second female parents who were married to/or in a civil partnership with the biological mother at the time of conception DO have parental responsibility. However, if conception was a result of sexual intercourse to which the second female wife/civil partner did not consent, then parental responsibility for her is void.

Step-parents DO NOT automatically have parental responsibility.

Grandparents DO NOT automatically have parental responsibility. 

So as an unmarried father, or a father not in a civil partnership, how can you obtain parental responsibility?

There are several ways to gain parental responsibility and these include:

1. Marrying or entering into a civil partnership with the biological mother.
2. Having his name registered or re-registered on the birth certificate if his name is not already registered.
3. Entering into a mutually consented Parental Responsibility Agreement with the mother. This is an agreement where both parents agree to allow shared parental responsibility when the parents are not married or in a civil partnership together.
4. Obtaining a Parental Responsibility Order from the court – under the Children Act 1989, fathers can apply when they are not married or in a civil partnership with the mother and the mother refuses to register or re-register the father on the birth certificate or refuses to sign a Parental Responsibility Agreement with him.
5. Having obtained a Child Arrangement Order (formally a Residence Order) which establishes with whom the child will live and being legally named as the resident parent.

Are Parental Responsibility and Child Maintenance linked?

No. Parental responsibility and child maintenance are, in law, completely separate. Regardless of your relationship status, the father still has a financial duty to provide child support. If you have any concerns about parental responsibility or find yourself in a position where agreement cannot be reached, Sheryl Perry Solicitors can help. We have the expertise and legal knowledge behind us to support you and your child in such situations.