Brough v Law & Anor
A brief period of reconciliation does not terminate a maintenance assessment under paragraph 16(1)(b); the provision is concerned with permanent loss of qualifying child status, not temporary cohabitation. Only continuous cohabitation for six months triggers termination under paragraph 16(1)(d).
- Parties
- Appellant: Michael Brough; First Respondent: Sharon Law; Second Respondent: Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 20 October 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Upper Tribunal (administrative Appeals Chamber)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Child Support, Maintenance Assessment, Statutory Interpretation, Termination of Maintenance Assessment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Michael Brough
Appellant
Sharon Law
First Respondent
Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
Second Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Upper Tribunal (administrative Appeals Chamber)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a brief period of reconciliation between parents terminates a maintenance assessment under paragraph 16(1)(b) of Schedule 1 to the Child Support Act 1991
- 2 Interpretation of 'qualifying child' and 'absent parent' under the Child Support Act 1991
- 3 Redundancy and interaction of statutory provisions in paragraph 16(1)
Ratio Decidendi
A brief period of reconciliation does not terminate a maintenance assessment under paragraph 16(1)(b); the provision is concerned with permanent loss of qualifying child status, not temporary cohabitation. Only continuous cohabitation for six months triggers termination under paragraph 16(1)(d).
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment