G v A (No 2) (Schedule 1 settlement of property) [2011] EWHC 968 (Fam) (23 March 2011)

G v A (No 2) (Schedule 1 settlement of property) [2011] EWHC 968 (Fam) (23 March 2011)

The father was in default of the order to pay £220,000 by 21 March 2011; there was no good reason for the default. The court had power to make freezing and disclosure orders and to seize the father's passport in aid of enforcement. Interim orders were necessary to secure compliance and protect the child's rights.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 968 (Fam)
Parties
Applicant (mother): G; Respondent (father): A
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Children Act 1989, Schedule 1 Proceedings / Interim Orders Following Enforcement Applications and Non Compliance With Financial Provision Order
Outcome
Interim orders granted; father's application to set aside payment date refused; passport temporarily released; freezing and disclosure orders made; hearing adjourned for compliance review.
Legal Topics
Enforcement of Financial Orders, Children Act 1989 Schedule 1, Trusts for Children, Freezing Injunctions, Passport Seizure, Disclosure of Assets
Family Law Trusts and Equity Child Law Enforcement of Financial Orders Children Act 1989 Schedule 1 Trusts for Children Freezing Injunctions Passport Seizure +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

G

Applicant (mother)

A

Respondent (father)

Procedural Posture

Children Act 1989, Schedule 1 Proceedings / Interim Orders Following Enforcement Applications and Non Compliance With Financial Provision Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the father is in default of the order to pay £220,000 for the benefit of the child
  2. 2 Whether there is good reason for the father's default
  3. 3 Whether the court has power to make a freezing order

Ratio Decidendi

The father was in default of the order to pay £220,000 by 21 March 2011; there was no good reason for the default. The court had power to make freezing and disclosure orders and to seize the father's passport in aid of enforcement. Interim orders were necessary to secure compliance and protect the child's rights.

Court Disposition

Interim orders granted; father's application to set aside payment date refused; passport temporarily released; freezing and disclosure orders made; hearing adjourned for compliance review.

Orders

  • Father's application to set aside payment date refused
  • Father's application for time in lieu of contact refused