Child Maintenance in UK Law

It is necessary now to refer to the mechanism which the judges thought might confer upon them jurisdiction. A practice has grown up, finding its origins before District Judge Segal in the Principal Registry, to make an order for spousal maintenance under section 23(1)(a) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 that incorporates some of the costs of supporting the children as part of a global order.

The merits of that scheme are not for the House in its judicial capacity to evaluate. The state has an interest, most directly in cases where public funds are disbursed, but also more generally that children should be adequately supported.

Curiously, the new statutory provisions do not extend to proceedings under Schedule 1 of the Children Act 1989, the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 or Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984.

The Judgments Act 1838 has been interpreted in the White Book at para.40.8.2 as being applicable to High Court proceedings and in a decision of the House of Lords in Thomas v Bunn [1991] 1 AC 362, Lord Ackner states, The Judgments Act 1838 refers laconically to "every judgment debt" and a literal reading of those words would suggest that it does apply to the Family Court.

The way in which the parent who properly has custody of a child may choose in a reasonable manner to order his or her way of life is one of those things which the parent who has not been given custody may well have to bear, eventhough one has every sympathy with the latter on some of the results.

Although the Schedule 1 carries the heading 'financial provision for children' paragraph 2 of the Schedule specifically permits application by persons over the age of 18 for orders for financial relief. Under paragraph 2(1)(b) a person over 18 may apply for a periodical payments order and/or a lump sum order against either or both of his parents if 'there are special circumstances which justify the making of an order'.