Over the festive period I gave you a

We had a number of fantastic entries and I’d like to thank you all for taking the time to submit your thoughts. As the issues surrounding the case were very much related to children law, the Head of our Children’s Department, Stephen Hopwood, will explore the scenario and announce a winner.

It is also worth noting that a Government announcement made today concerning the rights of divorced parents to see their children would have a significant bearing on a case of this kind in the future– a move that contrasts with proposals contained in the Family Justice Review  – but which I suggested should be done.

Although this is a fictional scenario, our children department at Stowe Family Law see cases with such difficult and complex issues each and every day. It can be easy to lose sight of how the children of the family are being affected when the parents have strong feelings against each other. It is our job to ensure that, whatever happens, the children’s best interests are at the forefront of everyone’s minds. It is vitally important to ensure that the children have proper parenting time with both parents. The advice of children lawyers must always bear this in mind and keep their client focused on this and not adult issues.

There was one answer that recognised this more than others: Carol Wright’s. Her response was family focused and accords very well with children legislation and the prevailing thinking about parenting. It also avoided the trap of allowing adult issues to impinge. Significantly, she spots that the situation is deteriorating fast and needs stabilising before there can be any improvement.

Carol considered that “the major issues will mean some serious compromise and good honest communication”. This is extremely important and in this situation we would seek to help the parties communicate for the sake of their children, despite how deeply they may feel they’ve been wronged. However, sometimes this can be the most difficult hurdle to overcome and therefore other third party professionals have to become involved such as therapists, mediators and counsellors. Ultimately, if the parents cannot make decisions for their children then a Court will, and its decision may not always be what either parent will want to hear.

It is indeed wrong to place children in a situation where either one of the parents is relying on the children emotionally, or even sometimes physically, if they do not realise they are doing it. This can cause emotional harm to the children and this must be avoided at all costs. The children need to rely upon their parents for support through a difficult and confusing time in their lives. They need to know that they are still going to have a secure home and upbringing. This is imperative when exercising parental responsibility.

There were hints within the scenario that perhaps the mother was trying to move away from the area to start a new life away from her estranged husband. This would be a valid reason if the circumstances of the marriage involved a fear of safety. In this scenario it could well be interpreted that the mother wants to move to punish the father. I believe Carol noted this when she said that: “The boys need to repair their relationship with their father or at least start to build bridges and ripping them away from all things familiar will not solve these issues”. Also, in order to help rebuild relationships between parents and children there has to be parenting time for both.

With regards to the new girlfriend, I agree with Carol that the father should not have introduced the children to her before the end of the marriage or at least until these confusing issues were resolved for the children. However, if Naomi does become a big part of the father’s life then the children will be introduced to her at some point in the future. But this has to be when the children are ready.

The children are going to be very upset about their parents separating and in order to do what is correct for them, the starting point has to be both parents taking time to provide reassurance. As Carol stated: “Above all the boys must be reassured that they are loved by both their parents, that the breakup is not their fault and things will be ok again.” Doing so will help them to deal with the separation and divorce in their own way.

Once again thank you to all who entered and Carol – we’ll be in touch to deliver your prize of chocolates and a bottle of champagne. 

Stephen Hopwood is a child law specialist and Head of the Children’s Department at Stowe Family Law. He has been involved in aspects of child law for over ten years and has particularly advanced the concept and practice of joint residence. He has also been involved with cases with complex foreign elements, and specialises in cases that have become “bogged down” or “written off”.

This summer

Given the overwhelming quality and number of the entries, I have decided to run another! This is a Christmas Competition, which will close on 3^rd January 2012 at 9am. Once again, I am asking you to give your opinion of the outcome. You don’t need to be a lawyer to take part and, although it’s a puzzle, there are no right or wrong answers. The prize will be a fabulous box of chocolates and a bottle of good champagne!

The focus this time is firmly on the children of the family. I also hope that by highlighting some of the issues our firm regularly encounters, some readers may be helped and inspired by other readers’ answers to resolve their own conflicts.

My view remains clear: however messy it may seem, no problem is ever insurmountable. It requires give and take, understanding of everyone’s feelings, common sense, and much goodwill. But isn’t that what this season is all about?

Ed and Jane have been married for 14 years. Ed, 44, is an investment banker in the City of London and now lives in rented accommodation near his work. Jane, 43, is a housewife and lives in East Dulwich, a fairly prosperous suburb in the south east of the capital. They have two children; Charlie is 12 and Sam is 10. The boys live with Jane in the family home.

Ed and Jane have both had occasional flings outside their marriage and they know about each other’s misdemeanours. They stayed together until Ed started an affair with Naomi last year. She works in Central London and lives in a flat in Pimlico. Naomi is 40 years old, divorced, and lives with her daughter Betsy, who is 8.

Ed was dazzled by Naomi; she was fun and exciting. His love for Jane had waned and had become more a “sisterly” affection and, although he never stopped respecting her abilities as a mother, Naomi emphasised how much the sparkle had gone from his marriage. After a great deal of soul searching, he made up his mind to leave.

He was sure his children would think the same of Naomi as he did and on one occasion, even engineered for Charlie and Sam to accidentally bump into Naomi and Betsy when he took them out for lunch after rugby practice. She was introduced as “a friend from work” and they all got on very well. Naomi said afterwards that she was thrilled to meet the boys and it was clear they liked her too. The boys said she was “hot”, but thought nothing more of it as Ed was careful to make sure it was as casual as possible.

Over the following months, the relationship between Ed and Jane became increasingly strained. Ed went to see a solicitor and was advised about his financial position. He felt he could afford to go ahead, so he made the decision to tell Jane about his feelings for Naomi, after which he wrote a long email to her in which he unburdened himself, going into detail about their relationship had changed. He then left home and he moved into a rented flat near his work but has been staying mostly with Naomi and Betsy.

Ed’s decision to leave came as a huge shock to Jane and the two boys.  All were distraught and even Ed became more distressed and emotional about the situation than he had thought he would be. It affected his focus at work. Money problems mounted too as he realised leaving home was going to cost more than he had anticipated. His carefully planned idea of an amicable divorce had taken a turn for the worse. In his mind, Jane was becoming incredibly and unnecessarily bitter; she employed highly expensive lawyers who on her instructions immediately issued proceedings.

As he saw it, she “went” for him. He now blames Jane for wrecking his relationship with his children, whose attitude towards him has changed. Ed has more or less given up communicating with Jane. Every email is bitter and unforgiving and Ed believes she is showing her true colours. He invariably responds in kind.

The boys were initially bewildered and shocked by their father’s sudden departure from home. They watch their mother alternate between shock, denial and anger and usually get a front row seat. She frequently breaks down in tears and starts ranting about their father and “that bloody woman”, before telling them how much they mean to her and that she is depending on them. They are scared too since she has told them they may be losing their home and that “it’s all because of their selfish father who has put his own happiness first”.

Ed’s overriding concern is for his children. At first he tried to give each of them the space to process what had happened, but he is growing increasingly fearful that their view is simply being made more partisan by Jane by the day. This is made worse by the fact that the children are feeling the pressure at school and at home. They love both their parents but do not know what to do or how to react. Of course they act as children; they feel desperately upset for their mother and for themselves, they are angry with their father who they believe has deserted them.

As yet Ed has not mentioned their mother’s adultery during the marriage but it has certainly crossed his mind since she has taken the moral high ground with the children. He believes the marriage broke down over many years, not just because of Naomi and he resents her attitude.

Charlie is being overprotective towards his mother and refuses to see, or even speak to his father. He will not talk to him on the phone and has completely cut him off. Jane has become increasingly dependent on Charlie, calling him “the man of the house” and “her rock”. She keeps saying, “How could I manage without you?”

Sam has become silent and withdrawn except that if pressed by Jane to say something, he will lash out and run to his room. Sam stays with his father, and is clingy when they are together. He is generally morose and moody with both parents. He does get on with Naomi and Betsy when they meet up at Ed’s flat and go out. At school however, he has become argumentative and his work is suffering. His teachers complain that he is becoming increasingly difficult.

One issue that no one saw coming is that the children no longer come as a unit. They have individual views and needs. Ed is bewildered trying to treat the children as adults (particularly Charlie), yet remembering that only a short time ago he treated them as children who did as they were told.

Jane is determined that Naomi will play no part whatsoever in the children’s lives. She refuses to permit them to meet her. Sam told her that he had met Naomi and Betsy and as a result Jane’s solicitors have said that until an undertaking is received that Naomi will not be present, there will be no further contact between Sam and his father. Sam is playing it both ways. He tells his parents and Charlie what he thinks they want to hear. Jane genuinely thinks he doesn’t like Naomi and Betsy.

As for the Christmas arrangements, the family has made it clear that Ed is unwelcome at home, citing that “it would be too distressing all round”. A letter he wrote to Charlie has been returned, unopened. Ed is informed that subject to the undertaking not to bring Sam into contact with Naomi he may see Sam on Boxing Day, but that thereafter they are all going to stay with Jane’s parents in Yorkshire until after the New Year to give the family some space.

Sam has told Ed that Jane is talking of moving the family back to Yorkshire when the house is sold. He told him: “Mum has been saying how green it is in Yorkshire. The people are friendly, there is lots of nice scenery and we will be getting dogs and going horse riding. We will have new schools, a new life and we will all be happy again. She says that ‘we don’t need Dad”.

Ed is deeply concerned. He wonders whether it might be easier all round to go along with Jane’s wishes. However, he feels he must see Charlie soon before things deteriorate further.  He is worried that his son is taking on too much emotional responsibility.  Ed is also worried about Sam, there is a danger that he too could slip through the net in the complicated emotional structure.

Another problem is that the schools are expressing concerns. Charlie has seen a school counsellor and now the Educational Welfare Officer wants to talk to Ed and Jane together. Jane won’t attend with Ed and has received a worrying letter in which she feels they are blaming her as the obstructive one.

Ed is upset at not being with his family on Christmas Day. Although he likes Betsy he feels tormented by the thought of spending Christmas with a child who is not his own. He can never feel the same about Betsy as he does about his own boys and her presence reinforces his feelings. It is affecting his behaviour towards Betsy, who in turn can sometimes be rude to him.

Overall, Ed sees his relationship with the children as deeply fractured and is appalled by the thought of the family moving up to Yorkshire. He thinks Jane is being downright evil and hitting back at him as hard as she can through the children.

Jane is furious and hurt. She blames Ed for all their problems. The possibility of calmly rising above those emotions to consider Ed as the good father he is will be difficult for her and she is in no mood for compromise at the moment.

What is YOUR advice to this family?

With Christmas imminent, what should they do next? 

The image for this post is ‘All Saints Day 1’ by Wassily Kandinsky, 1911. A fitting choice for this post not only for the fact that all the subjects are wearing halos, but also because of Kandinsky’s little known Leeds connections. In 1907, the then Vice Chancellor of Leeds University, Michael Sadler, was a friend and early advocate of the artist, displaying his works in the city. Sadler built up a remarkable collection of expressionist and abstract expressionist art at a time when such art was either unknown or dismissed in London. That’s right; Leeds was ahead of its time!

Some of the year’s most popular posts are listed below, and I was also interested to note how different the list is to this time last year. Some of the older posts continue to draw lots of readers, but in the current climate perhaps it isn’t surprising that maintenance payments and property-related issues are hot topics. There are, however, several new entrants. The new Family Procedure Rules, which came into force in April, are a must-read for clients as well as lawyers. The case of Kernott v Jones, a cohabitees’ property dispute heard in the Supreme Court earlier this year, seems to have made a lot of people sit up straight. In fact, almost half the posts below concern cohabitation: to me, this serves to show how the calls to reform cohabiting couples’ rights (or lack of rights) have continued to gather volume over the past 12 months.

Finally, I am pleased to see that three guest bloggers from Stowe Family Law’s talented team have made the cut this year! Rachel Baul specialises in all areas of family law and wins rave reviews from the firm’s clients. Paul Read is a solicitor and former barrister, who will be transferring to our London office in the New Year. Laura Guillon is a trainee solicitor whose detailed and informative posts about parents, children and moving away were, I think, brought to life by her personal experiences.

Maintenance payments and a new partner: bad news for cohabitees? (Part 2)

“The Court of Appeal has issued a judgment that should help to resolve this grey area, even though it will mean wives who choose to cohabit could stand to lose their maintenance. Put starkly, in line with changing social attitudes the pendulum has swung away from dependent wives. They may now be faced with very tough choices post-divorce: do they live with someone, or keep their maintenance?”

Mesher Orders and Martin Orders: What You Need To Know

“A Mesher order is one that I would advise a client to avoid if possible. Such a proposal is commonly made during negotiations by the spouse who continues to pay maintenance. If the other spouse has hopes for an amicable settlement and wishes to remain in the marital home, a Mesher order can appear to be an attractive option. Unfortunately, it can result in far more long-term problems than it solves in the short-term.”

Delaying the Decree Absolute: another look at Miller Smith v Miller Smith

“If one party wants the divorce to be finalised but the other does not, and the parties’ finances have not been resolved, may the decree absolute be delayed?”

Kernott v Jones: a case of square pegs and round holes

“The appeal in Kernott v Jones was heard today by the Supreme Court. It was heard by five heavyweight judges including Baroness Hale and Sir Nicholas Wilson, in his first case as a new appointee to the Court.

“The question at hand is this: to what extent (if at all) will the Supreme Court push the boundaries of joint property law ownership, where one party has contributed far more than the other?”

Maintenance payments and a new partner – what happens next? (Part 1)

“Your ex-wife has moved on and is now happily living with a new partner. They are in a stable, supportive relationship and he doesn’t seem short of cash. So why are you still paying her regular maintenance?”

The CSA: Rachel Baul Answers More of Your Questions

“Question: I have been charged arrears and the CSA cannot provide a breakdown of these arrears. What can I do? I’m still having to pay, although I know for a fact I do not owe them. This is on top of what I already pay – in total, £320 out of £1000 a month”

Family Procedure Rules 2010: Financial Orders

This post is part of a series about the Family Procedure Rules 2010, which focuses upon some of the most important changes for practitioners and clients. Today we are going to look at Part 9 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010: Applications for a Financial Remedy. It is time to say goodbye to the archaic term ancillary relief, and hello to the financial order.

Family Procedure Rules 2010: A Guide

The Family Procedure Rules 2010, which are effective from 6 April 2011, are an essential read for solicitors and clients throughout England and Wales because they herald major changes in family law’s procedures and practice. When they come into force there will be just one code, which is intended to modernise and standardise family court practice across the High Court, County Court and Magistrates’ Court.

The law on cohabitation and property: who owns the house? By guest blogger Paul Read.

“In short, the law for cohabiting couples in dispute over property is something of a mess and in urgent need of clarification. But as it stands, and to gain a full picture of the situation, there are several issues that need to be explored.”

External relocation: when a parent wishes to move overseas with a child, what rules apply? By guest blogger Laura Guillon.

“If a relationship breaks down and there are children involved, what rules are applied to cases when one parent wishes to move with the children to another country? In this post, we will be looking at the rules – and how they could change in the future.”

With our new London office opening on January 3^rd, the last few months have been manically busy and involved a large amount of travelling away from home. The few days’ breathing room over the next week will be a true blessing. I am going to wrap up warm and look forward to the greatest gift I know – quality time with my family.

I am very grateful to you all for following my blog, and I would like to wish you all a very happy and peaceful Christmas. In the words of Jose Feliciano, “I want to wish you a Merry Christmas from the bottom of my heart”. I have always loved his song ‘Feliz Navidad’. The simplicity of its lyrics and jubilant melody remind me of all the best elements of the season, whatever your faith: the simple joy and happiness of spending time with people we love.

I recently discovered this version of The Three Tenors singing it; a wonderful rendition. To all my readers, thank you once again and ‘Feliz Navidad, Prospero Año y Felicidad’.

P.S. We’ve received so many imaginative and thoughtful Christmas cards at the Stowe Family Law offices over the past few weeks. But one in particular caught my eye. This playful Christmas email was sent by Sir Peter Singer and features a picture taken during a recent trip to Poland. He has kindly allowed me to post the image – which he described as a “reflective moment”!

Being a personable, studious chap, finding interim employment didn’t take him too long, but Ben has discovered what every erstwhile student finds out in their first job – life irrevocably changes. The order and pattern of his old world has been turned upside down. The earth-shattering intensity with which he approached his studies is currently no longer necessary or even required in his job. There is no immediately discernible goal to aim for and he is no longer his own man. At work, he is a menial cog in a big machine with long experienced players and, as he ruefully admits, his brain is not particularly in demand. For a highly focused and intelligent individual who has always pursued a certain goal, it’s been quite a shock to his system. There simply isn’t a defined goal in or out of work.

Some people wouldn’t mind but Ben and his equally conscientious friends are finding that a lack of a defined goal, the uncertainty of the future which comes alongside and the removal of the security of an academic environment can be very difficult to handle. They are eager, too eager perhaps to find out what lies in store for them. They are learning that it isn’t up to them anymore and that they can no longer dictate the pace, leaving them feeling their lives are somewhat out of control. It is clearly frustrating for them all.

I am sure it doesn’t feel like that to them, but what a good lesson in life Ben and his friends are learning!

All the rest of us, who have had jobs for years, are used to climbing unquestioning onto our working treadmill. We know it moves at different paces during the working week; we don’t control the speed and no longer question why not. We have long-since become used to the steep inclines, the immediate dips afterwards, the highs and lows that come with patches of boredom, all of which constitute an average working week. For most of us, the security of academia with its pre-set targets, a steady but achievable incline and a defined goal at the end is a dim and distant memory.

So what follows is my welcome speech to the real world, dedicated to Ben and his friends! The world where ‘order’ ‘security’ and ‘certainty’ is all in the past. Or is it?

Firstly, welcome to a world of work where, on the face of it, nothing at all is safe or even certain any more. Welcome to a world of work where no-one is guaranteed a pay cheque at the end of a month because no-one of us knows with absolute certainty that we will have a job at the end of the month. The likelihood of course is that we will, but some will find that, come the end of the month, that security can vanish despite there still being a mortgage to pay and a family to feed.

Welcome to a world of work where there is no certainty in the work you will ever do. For example, the day may start off well, but it may not end that way. There will be ups and downs, highs and lows. There will be traumatic days which seem to mirror earthquakes, days that go off the scale and conversely, there will be days so triumphant, you wish they would never end. But just like after watching the movie ‘Jaws’ you will soon learn never to overlook a ripple in the water that might signify a lurking menace. You will also learn that the ripple might just as easily calm as quickly as it began and resort back to a tranquil sea.

Overall, working life is tough and it is an undeniable fact that the more passionate you are about your work and the higher you try to fly, the more challenges you will meet and the harder it will become. That treadmill can get much steeper without warning, the pace will get faster and the potentially perilous tumble downhill can be harder to avoid as you relentlessly keep climbing upwards through your working life.

Secondly, real life mirrors the world of work in high definition! Real life cannot be controlled either; it never goes how you think it will. You may expect one outcome one day and then hey – you get another. Where did that come from? How did that happen? It wasn’t meant to happen like that. But it did. So being at work and feeling out of control in your job is actually a good grounding for dealing with situations in the outside world too. Out in that big wide world you may feel you have no control either, but we all feel like that from time to time. Most things you will be able to exercise a degree of control over, but sometimes, when you least expect it, life throw a curve-ball; life hits you out of the left field.

I am sorry to say that many of those curve-balls will be thrown by other people aiming  at you. Not everyone has a strong character, not everyone has it in them to do the right thing, and not everyone will treat you with unconditional kindness that your family does. Still, remember to hold your head high. Earn the respect of those around you. There is no need ever to fear challenges from anyone and doing what is right will help you rise above them all. You will find those challenges will simply melt away, but keep your focus as new challenges will swiftly follow!

It is only natural at certain times to crave some security, some order and certainty; to step off that treadmill, if only for a short while. I know I certainly do. When I need that comfort, I find there is nothing better than looking at the world around me.

This week across the world, people will be symbolically lighting up their lives and lives of their loved ones with candles and festivals at the very point when our winter days are as short and dark as they get. Our family will celebrate ‘Chanukah’ with the lighting of a candle every night for 8 nights. We will give presents and eat doughnuts. Well, some of us will eat doughnuts. You know me, Ben: they are far too fattening!

From here on in, days will start to get longer and the sun stronger. The weather will get warmer and we can look forward to spring and summer and yes, even autumn and winter again. Each year, every year, we are blessed with an unchanging beauty in this supreme order of things, far beyond our understanding. Like a constant circle, it is planned and certain.

At the weekend, I went for a drive through a stunning wintery scene in my beloved Yorkshire Dales. Through Ilkley and Bolton Abbey I drove along the undulating roads of the countryside and then up to Threshfield high in the Dales. The roads were deserted. As I kept going upwards, I watched the fields and hills change colour until I was so high up, the hills were snow-capped. I watched the sky change colour too, there was a painter’s palette of colours in the clouds, especially as the sun started to set and I marvelled at the magnificence and the certainty of it all. Every day that same scene is there. It repeats itself, although the colours are never the same. Every shade of the rainbow was reflected in the hills fields and sky.

Eventually I discovered why there were so few cars on the road. In Grassington there was a Dickensian Festival with shopkeepers dressed up in Victorian costume. Cars and coaches packed the surrounding car parks and the streets thronged with shoppers relishing the feel of days gone by. People were out in force in that little Dales town, laughing and shopping. I saw entire families together, young and old, enjoying themselves.

What a wonderful drive home! It took all afternoon and until early evening by which time it was dark. Nearing my house the stars and a new moon were coming out and twinkling in the clear sky, lighting my way home as they light up for each one of us, guiding us all.

So Ben, you and your friends should simply accept life is not within your control or gift. Instead just embrace your own uncertain journey and enjoy it. Expect the undulating roads and learn to see the highs and lows for what they are, look out for when they occur and take them in your stride as you would any journey in the car. Be as best prepared for the unexpected as you can be, and don’t let yourself be thrown by a curve-ball out of the left field. But equally, never be afraid to take comfort from the order, certainty and security of our beautiful world and the treasures which envelop us all.

Albert Einstein once wrote, “Look deep into nature, and then you will understand everything better.” I am certain nature is designed for you to do so, from the hills of the Yorkshire Dales to the red desert mountains and the coral seas of Eilat.

Much love to you Ben,

‘Chanukah Sameach’

Mum

X

Image credit: Grassington Dickensian Festival

My Christmas present from Stowe Family Law’s PR agency, Tinderbox Media, made me laugh at the end of a hectic week and I wanted to share it with you. Karyn Fleeting who heads the agency is about to give birth within a few days but stays at work as if nothing is happening – although I think her Christmas is going to be very busy indeed! She walked over to my office in Harrogate to deliver this incredibly thoughtful gift. It is a Tom Knight illustration inspired by a tongue-in-cheek comment I made on this blog back in September, in response to a reader who thanked me for some advice.

Our new London office on Fulwood Place is in the background – and even my Birkin bag has been faithfully reproduced!

With 2012 shaping up to be a busy year, I could probably do with some wheels…

Beachy Head and the hills of the South Downs, near Eastbourne in East Sussex, were close to where we were staying at the weekend.  It is possible to walk (or run or cycle) for mile after undisturbed mile, and there is a welcoming pub on the journey. We passed lone walkers, small groups and families with young children, all out walking the chalk hills.

Other groups of volunteer walkers tread the same pathways, but for different reasons. They are watching for people who contemplate suicide. Beachy Head may be beautiful, but it also has a reputation as one of the saddest places on Earth, a place where people go to jump and end it all.

Suicidal thoughts are not the same as suicidal acts. In my work, I often encounter people who tell me that a partner has threatened to commit suicide. In life, I have found that the people who do commit suicide are – thankfully – rare. In my experience these cases have often been unexpected, and have been people who were never judged to be at risk.  I have wanted to understand why but the answers, when there are answers, are often wanting in themselves.

By a horrible coincidence, news broke the next day about the tragic death of the Wales football manager Gary Speed, aged just 42. Why he chose to do what he did is currently unknown, but the reasons will come out in due course. In the meantime the news has been met with shock and sympathy from sport fans and non-sport fans alike, and tributes have been pouring in.

I walked to Beachy Head twice at the weekend. Both times it was interesting to note how the light was different, depending on the direction in which you were facing. Heading east, towards Beachy Head, the light faded. Both times, when I turned on my heel to head back towards Eastbourne, I noticed how much lighter and sunnier it was heading west. I took two photos:

Heading east: Beachy Head.

Heading west again, 15 minutes later.

Local people in Eastbourne have told me that Beachy Head’s reputation has “cast a shadow” over their seaside town. I think they are right – perhaps in more ways than one.

Up on that cliff path, with the sea swirling below, I certainly had an impression of great sadness. However it wasn’t a bleak place to be. If anything it felt very peaceful up there.  But I didn’t find an answer to the question of why Beachy Head draws the desperate and the defeated to its edge. To me it was a very beautiful and exhilarating walk, albeit one with a sad and unpleasant history. Perhaps that very same beauty is where the answer lies.

Back in Eastbourne, we walked along the promenade and finally headed back to our hotel. It was the same hotel where, more than 100 years ago, Debussy completed his great work La Mer. Musicians have described it as a “miracle of natural reproduction” and “the most beautiful [recording] in the whole history of the gramophone”. Debussy’s view from his suite, of the very same sea that swirls below Beachy Head, inspired him to create great music rather than to dark thoughts of hopelessness and death.

When there are no clear answers, it is difficult to help. But to my mind, this also means that we cannot and should not judge. You turn one way or another, towards the dark or towards the light – and that also goes for those who are left behind. Let us hope that those driven to take their lives, wherever and however they have chosen to do so, find rest; and that those who are left behind find peace.

If you need to speak to someone:

Samaritans provides confidential emotional support 24/7 to those experiencing despair, distress or suicidal feelings.

The wonderful charity MIND also provides a confidential advice and support service.

Certainly people seemed to like the novelty of having a woman in the legal business on the shopping parade, and I enjoyed copying the smart suits, stacked shoulder pads and the obligatory big hair of the glamorous women lawyers in L.A. Law. My little office became quite a hit; I was soon able to take on more lawyers and staff, eventually moving to much bigger purpose-built premises. On the whole, despite one or two incidents, I don’t believe simply being a woman solicitor in Leeds hindered me at all. In fact it was a positive.  Being a working mother, however, is different and certainly clipped my wings until Ben left school. That was my choice.

However the recent speech by Lord Neuberger about the lack of women judges concentrated my mind. He is so concerned by the absence of women on the bench he is actually calling for the use of positive law to ensure more women are appointed to the judiciary. Lady Hale made her own position very clear when she commented that she “shouldn’t have to stick out like a bad tooth” as a judge, which she clearly believes she does. Personally, I think the epithet “shining light” would be more appropriate.

Why is being a woman in the judiciary still an issue in the 21^st century? Or, motherhood aside, is it the case that women happen to be caught up in an issue that is more complex and wide-ranging? I wonder.

For example, on occasions I have noticed what can only be described as a smug attitude to anyone – practitioner or judge – who doesn’t hail from an office in Central London. I recently saw one affidavit in which a London solicitor, in a bold effort to have a case transferred out of the provinces and into London, stated that only a judge sitting in the capital could possibly appreciate the complexity of the case. Why? Do judges undergo lobotomies when they step outside the M25?

Perhaps this warped perception is the inevitable result of working within such a tight geographical boundary. So much wealth is concentrated in and around the capital. There are cutting edge cases in Central London and also, undoubtedly, great technical expertise. The majority of lawyers who practise there are very able.  But none of this renders the work of provincial courts less important. Nor does it dwarf the abilities of all those professionals who are not based in London, but who are engaged in exactly the same work – usually at a much reduced cost!

Over the years, solicitors in our Yorkshire and Cheshire offices have been instructed in several cases by clients with previous experience of some Central London lawyers in their divorce cases. Many of these clients had previously paid substantial fees for what they expected would be some kind of “magic service” unavailable outside the capital. They have come to us after discovering, to their cost, that this is not necessarily the case.

Other clients are based in London, and have instructed us after seeing for themselves how we handle ourselves against the London opposition, and who prefer our approach and outcomes. Not every lawyer can please every client, irrespective of location.

Even so, I have still watched some London-based barristers struggle with the names of unfamiliar (i.e. non-London) places and courts. At other times I have noticed how, advising in conference, the same barristers suddenly become “uber posh”, their cut-glass accents becoming even more pronounced. I suspect that many non-London lawyers, male and female, have encountered similar. I have also found that clients can be put off by it, rather than impressed.

Smug attitudes can then wend their way upwards, when the same barristers make it to the High Court Bench. I once watched, amazed, at a law conference when one very senior judge began his address by reading out the names of his friends, all of them Central London-based solicitors whom he wished to acknowledge in public. Everyone else in the audience found it difficult to believe he had shown such insensitivity to the rest of the solicitors assembled there, who had travelled to London for that conference – and none of whom he could possibly know. The judge hadn’t the faintest idea he had offended approximately 98% of the audience. He misguidedly thought he was being “chummy”.

At another conference a high court judge was far more blunt, making no bones about his lack of regard for provincial lawyers. His comments were particularly cutting as his audience was made up of the very people he was insulting.

Another example of discrimination at work is summed up rather neatly by this latest post from BabyBarista. Why do some barristers treat solicitors differently, less deferentially and with less respect?

Recently John Wotton, the President of the Law Society, wrote about how the number of solicitors taking higher judicial office remains very low. You know, I can think of a few women barristers from outside London who have done so, plus a few London solicitors who have made it against all the odds, but I can’t think of any women solicitors from outside London who have climbed that ladder!

Perhaps my peers would be encouraged to apply in greater numbers if the higher levels of the judiciary were made more accessible to solicitors, and if judges were encouraged to socialise with both branches of the legal profession when travelling across the country, rather than treating solicitors with the same disdain that blows around the Bar.

So while I concur that women in the legal profession have been and continue to be discriminated against, I am far from convinced that bad attitudes within the profession are limited to the “woman issue”. I think there is rather more to it than that.

And what is this woman solicitor from Leeds going to do in the meantime?

Well, I’m always up for a challenge – and so Yorkshire comes to London! Stowe Family Law solicitors have been seeing clients in London for some time now, and we are about to move into our new premises in the capital. At long last our lovely new office on Fulwood Place, High Holborn, will be fully open and operational from the beginning of January.

It is very exciting walking up Fulwood Place (above) to check out the progress of the building works. I experience exactly the same feelings of nerves and excitement that I did when launching my first tiny office all those years ago. Our builders are all from Leeds or thereabouts and I must admit, it’s great to hear those familiar accents. Their voices are strong, reassuring and always cheerful. They have done a great job, on time and cheaper than all the comparative quotes we received from London.

“Y’all right, love?” most ask me, as I’m walking round the building, before the conversation takes its inevitable turn towards rugby league. A similarly friendly, Yorkshire welcome is exactly what I intend to give my clients, and with Yorkshire prices to boot. Who knows? A breath of fresh Yorkshire air might just be what’s required to blow out a few of those Central London cobwebs…!

Mr Rinfret is no stranger to family law battles. His divorce from his second wife, Cindy, has been described as “contentious”. The former marital home in Greenwich, Connecticut, is on the market for $12 million.

It appears that following a whirlwind romance, during which their son was conceived, Melissa Porter tried out family life in the USA but found it wanting. The family moved to the UK earlier this year, when Miss Porter resumed her TV work and was reported to be looking for a holiday home to rent in Cheshire.

Alas, now it is Peter Winfret who has found family life in another country wanting. According to the article, the family was setting up a new home in London when Mr Winfret decided that he wanted to end the relationship and return to the USA, where he wishes to raises their son.

What happens now?

If what I have read is correct, then I expect that Mr Winfret is considering his options under the Hague Convention for an order for the return of the child to the USA. A legal battle in the USA could follow, even though the financial implications would undoubtedly be heavier for him if the case was fought there. Miss Porter has already made it clear that she does not wish to live in the USA. If a case was fought in that country she would be placed on the back foot, tactically speaking, not least because of the high costs.

These are the real, serious pitfalls of international romance and international family relocation, especially when one partner’s financial “clout” outweighs the other partner’s. Such a situation is far from unusual: our firm’s International Family Law Department takes on many such cases. It is also worth noting that Laura Guillon’s series of posts from earlier this year, about parents who wish to move overseas with children, continue to draw many hundreds of readers every month.

Experience tells me that if an international battle royale looms large and Melissa Porter does not seek specialist legal advice promptly, she could be in trouble.

Which court would gain jurisdiction? Would it be the USA, where the child was born and where the family was living until recently? Or would there be a case for England, where the family last lived together? Admittedly this was for a short period only, but England is where the English mother intends to remain permanently.

If the facts as reported are correct and Miss Porter is properly advised, my money would be on England. I believe that she would have a good case to oppose an application for the “return” of the baby, on the basis that the baby was habitually resident in England at the time of the application for his return to the USA.

The case of H v K (Children)

My take would seem to be confirmed by a new Court of Appeal judgment, to which John Bolch referred in his recent comment on my post about habitual residence and divorce. The test of habitual residence in a divorce case is quite different to the test of habitual residence in a children case. In the latter, the test is based entirely on the facts.

H v K (Children) concerned two children, aged eight and two. The family lived in Australia, but came to England for a year to live in a house owned by the mother. When the year was up it was decided that the father would return to Australia, but that the mother and children would remain in England for a further period. When the mother later announced that she would not go back to Australia with the children, the father brought a case for their return under the Hague Convention. The court found in his favour, and the mother appealed.

The court cited with approval the comments of Lord Scarman, from the case of Re Shah 1983 in the House of Lords:

There are two, and no more than two, respects in which the mind of the propositus is important in determining ordinary residence. The residence must be voluntarily adopted… And there must be a degree of settled purpose. The purpose may be one or there may be several. It may be specific or general. All the law requires is that there is a settled purpose.

In the case of H v K, Lord Justice Ward looked at the facts, applied the case of Shah and allowed the mother’s appeal, dismissing the father’s application.

He commented:

I do fear that the judge has allowed her focus to move erroneously to require more permanence for their sojourn here than is necessary to establish that the habitual residence of the family became established in England if only for a temporary stay of 12 months.

It follows that if necessary, Melissa Porter should be able to establish the baby’s habitual residence in England, oppose his return to the USA and issue her application for a financial settlement under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989, with the case proceeding in England.

Of course, we don’t know all the facts. For all we know, Miss Porter may already have taken such steps. Her application for suitable housing for her child and herself, a lump sum, a car, a budget to suit the baby’s requirements and so on may already be in progress. Perhaps the father has hit back with a Hague Convention application. Perhaps the situation has already been, or is about to be, resolved amicably. Whatever the truth is, this case centres upon the life of a tiny child who deserves to have both of his parents in his life.

Two final points.if you are planning to relocate to another country with your partner, don’t even entertain the move unless you are 100 per cent sure of your relationship.

As unromantic as it sounds, I also recommend that you iron out the potential family law issues before you leave this country. A carefully drafted, watertight agreement – be it a prenup, a postnup or a cohabitation agreement – is advisable. Ultimately, however, it’s your call…

His achievements and the happiness he brought to others - particularly through the estimated £40 million that he raised for charitable causes – have been well documented by every British newspaper, television channel and radio station.

However Sir Jim was also dubbed an eccentric and a loner by some people who clearly didn’t know him at all. These opinions were formed presumably because he never married and refused to have a cooker in his flat. Good for him! Instead he dined out. He was always at the local pizza restaurant and pub. So what?

It is also true that he never married. In fact, whenever I saw him he would tease me about it.

“Hey, it’s the Barracuda!” he would say, referring to my nickname. “You’ll never get me!”

I would bump into Sir Jim fairly regularly when I visited my parents, who lived in the same apartment block as him for 30 years in Roundhay Park, Leeds. It was always good to see him: peroxide blonde hair flying, trademark big glasses, running along or later (but only when he reached his eighties) walking. Usually he would be wearing one of his signature, flamboyant tracksuits and carrying a cigar. Sometimes I would see him driving past in his open-top Rolls-Royce, again with a cigar in his hand. He waved and smiled to everyone he passed – and they waved and smiled back. People loved him.

Once I was miles away, on the other side of Leeds, when I bumped into him while I was training for the London Marathon. He greeted me with a smile and a wave; although he was fresh as a daisy, he could see that I was flat out! I also saw him in the Leeds General Infirmary, where he did voluntary work as a porter. There wasn’t an ounce of pretension about him. He was a genuine, down-to-earth and decent man.

A few years ago, when Dad and I were running the Leeds Half Marathon together, Sir Jimmy Savile was the star guest. Wearing his Nike gold lurex running outfit, he started the race. You couldn’t help but smile – not at him, but with him. He had that gift of cheering people up.

Sometimes my dad would run races alongside Sir Jimmy. As a member of Sir Jimmy Savile’s party, he would receive star treatment at the London Marathon and the Great North Run. (Unlike his daughter, who didn’t get a separate start, a fast getaway from the finishing line and a posh tent with refreshments in which to recover at the end!)

My dad is a quiet, private man; yesterday he told me that if I must write about Sir Jimmy, he didn’t want his own name mentioned. As if! However I know that the two of them got on very well, running together and living in the same place for so many years. The photo above was taken of them in their heyday, about to embark upon the Great North Run and clearly having lots of fun. My dad is the second man on the right, wearing the headband. Would you believe that both men were about sixty at the time? My dad reckons that they were in their prime.  Sir Jim was about five years older than Dad – and you will note that despite the health warnings and the famous cigar, marathon running clearly suited him.

The man standing on my dad’s right is their old pal: the late, great Jimmy Corrigan, who ran fairgrounds and amusement arcades in Scarborough, where Sir Jim also had a home. Sir Jim and Jimmy Corrigan both referred clients to me in the past. These three looked great, didn’t they? Those running years were good times for them. My father treasures this photo, and rightly so.

Yesterday, thinking about the good years, Dad reminded me about the time in 1984 when Sir Jimmy found out that my granny was in St James’s Hospital. Unsolicited, he discovered which ward she was in and sent her a signed get well card (with a typically flamboyant signature!) along with a beautiful bouquet of flowers. She was thrilled.

I also remember how, years later, my dad told Sir Jimmy about the Laniardo Hospital in Israel, which treated my mum after her fall there. The hospital, which makes no distinction between Israeli Jew and Arab, between Palestinian and Israeli, is largely self-funded. A few days later, again unsolicited, Sir Jimmy sent my father a substantial cheque for the hospital’s funds.

It has only recently become public knowledge that earlier this year, Sir Jimmy Savile donated £50,000 to pay for a scanner at the oncology department at St James’s University Hospital. Such private, unsolicited acts of generosity were typical of the man – and are surely the mark of a genuinely good person, untouched by fame.

Incidentally, the runner in the photo who is wearing the red armband is Howard Silverman, a close friend of Sir Jimmy Savile’s for many years. Howard paid moving tributes to Sir Jimmy this weekend on the BBC, and said that those who called Sir Jimmy a “loner” didn’t know him at all. True, Sir Jimmy didn’t fit any established mould. But then one-off, stellar people rarely do.

RIP Sir Jimmy Savile. Thank you for your wonderful generosity of spirit. Roundhay Park, my family and the people of Leeds will miss you. We celebrate your life, which brought happiness to so many people.