S. v S. (Children: Periodical Payments)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 1993 |
| Date | 1993 |
| Court | Family Division |
Children - Family proceedings court - Appeal from - Father failing to meet periodical payments orders - Enforcement summons issued - Father's summons for variation of periodical payments and remission of arrears - Justices refusing to vary or remit and ordering imprisonment in default of payment of arrears -
After a marriage lasting 10 years the parents of two boys, aged 10 and seven years, separated. On an application by the mother the father was ordered by the family proceedings court to make periodical payments of £25 a week to each of the boys. The father paid nothing, arrears accumulated, and the clerk to the justices issued an enforcement summons under the
On the father's appeal against both the refusal to discharge or vary the periodical payments orders and the order for enforcement of the arrears: —
Held, (1) that the court had power under section 94 of the Children Act 1989 to review on the presentation of a single notice of appeal a discretionary determination made by justices dealing with both the appropriate level of continuing periodical payments and the enforcement or remission of past arrears on a summons brought under the
(2) Allowing the appeal, that failure by justices to state and record in writing their reasons and findings of fact before making orders under the Children Act 1989, as required by rule 21 of the
The following cases are referred to in the judgment:
Berry v. Berry [
Hillingdon London Borough Council v. H. [
No additional cases were cited in argument.
APPEAL from Harrow Family Proceedings Court.
On 31 January 1992 the justices ordered the father of two boys to make periodical payments of £25 a week to each son. On 6 October 1992, the justices refused applications by the father to vary or to remit the arrears. They further ordered him to pay the arrears of £1,100 within 21 days with a penalty of 30 days' imprisonment for default. By notice dated 13 October 1992 the father appealed against the justices' refusal to discharge or vary the orders for periodical payments and against the order requiring him to pay the arrears which had accumulated under the orders within 21 days. The grounds of appeal were that (1) the justices placed excessive reliance on the possibility that the father could obtain night-time employment as a mini-cab...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
P v P (Periodical Payments: Appeals)
...Court under section 29(1) of the 1978 Act. In support of that proposition he had relied on S v S (Children: Periodical payments)ELR ((1993) Fam 200). In S v S the original application for periodical payments and the application to vary had been made under the 1989 Act. Mr Justice Thorpe had......
-
Re W (Child: Contact)
...County Council[1993] 2 FCR 676. S v S (Children: Financial Provision)[1993] 1 FCR 805; sub nom S v S (Children: Periodical Payments) [1993] 2 WLR 401. AppealAppeal from the Crawley family proceedings Sorrell Dixon for the father. Anne Studd for the child. MR JUSTICE WALL.This is an appeal b......
-
T v W (Contact: Reasons for Refusing Leave)
...2 FCR 885. M (Prohibited Steps Order: Application for Leave), Re[1993] 1 FCR 78. S v S (Children: Financial Provision)[1993] 1 FCR 805; [1993] Fam 200; [1993] 2 WLR Christopher Wall for the applicant. Daniel Matovu for the mother. MR JUSTICE CONNELL.The appellant in this case is aged 44. Th......
- T v W (Contact: Reasons for Refusing Leave)