E -v- F (Family) [2013] JRC 185A (24 September 2013)

E -v- F (Family) [2013] JRC 185A (24 September 2013)

The court found that the mother is the primary carer and is maximising her earning capacity, while the father has manipulated his working arrangements to reduce his income and is not maximising his earning capacity. The current accommodation is inadequate for A, and the father has sufficient resources to provide for a more suitable home and increased maintenance. The court determined that a lump sum for property and furnishings, as well as increased child maintenance, are justified and affordable given the father's assets and income. The welfare and needs of A require provision that reflects the father's standard of living and ensures stability for the child.

Citation
[2013] JRC 185A
Parties
Applicant: E; Respondent: F
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
24 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Schedule 1 Children (jersey) Law 2005 Application / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Child Maintenance, Lump Sum Provision, Property Settlement for Child Benefit, Parental Responsibility, Contact Arrangements
Family Law Child Law Child Maintenance Lump Sum Provision Property Settlement for Child Benefit Parental Responsibility Contact Arrangements

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 39
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E

Applicant

F

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Schedule 1 Children (jersey) Law 2005 Application / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate level of child maintenance for A?
  2. 2 Should a lump sum and/or property settlement be ordered for the benefit of A?
  3. 3 Is the mother maximising her earning capacity?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the mother is the primary carer and is maximising her earning capacity, while the father has manipulated his working arrangements to reduce his income and is not maximising his earning capacity. The current accommodation is inadequate for A, and the father has sufficient resources to provide for a more suitable home and increased maintenance. The court determined that a lump sum for property and furnishings, as well as increased child maintenance, are justified and affordable given the father's assets and income. The welfare and needs of A require provision that reflects the father's standard of living and ensures stability for the child.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • Father to pay increased child maintenance of £700 per month plus half of A's school fees and specified additional expenses.
  • Father to provide a lump sum of £300,000 towards the purchase of a home for A, repayable to the father upon A reaching 18 or ceasing full-time tertiary education, with the house to be in the mother's sole name for the benefit of A.