Search and find what you need faster.

Alienating behaviour: Where are we now?

Posted on: April 17th, 2025 by zhewison

Jim Richards, gives us the latest insights on alienating behaviour in family law. In this article he breaks down the Family Justice Council’s 2024 review and what it means for handling parental alienation cases.

In December 2024, the Family Justice Council (FJC) published a comprehensive review on parental alienation and alienating behaviours. This long-debated issue has now been addressed with clear guidance aimed at assisting judges, and those in litigation in dealing with allegations of this nature.

A new approach to parental alienation

The FJC’s guidance marks a significant shift in how parental alienation is approached. It confirms that there is no “syndrome” of parental alienation. Instead, the focus should be on the behaviour, context, and reasons why a child is reluctant, resistant, or refuses to spend time with one parent.

The test for alienating behaviour

The guidance outlines a three-part test for identifying alienating behaviour:

  1. The child is reluctant, resists, or refuses to engage with a parent.
  2. This reluctance is not due to the behaviour of that parent towards the child or the other parent.
  3. The other parent has behaved in a way that has led directly or indirectly to the child’s reluctance to engage in a relationship with the other parent.
    All three elements must be present for a finding of alienation.

Moving away from past practices

This new approach moves away from the previous tendency to use alienation as a catch-all explanation for a child’s reluctance to spend time with a parent. The courts will no longer entertain this approach, especially if there is any finding of domestic abuse.

The role of the court

The report emphasises that the court is the ultimate decision-maker in these cases. Experts and Cafcass (Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service) cannot determine whether specific events took place. It is the court’s role to decide if domestic abuse or alienating behaviours have occurred. Allegations must be supported by evidence; fake assertions will not suffice.

The importance of early action

Relevant issues must be raised early in the process, with appropriate case management directions given. It is not acceptable to introduce allegations late in the proceedings to strengthen a weak case.

Looking ahead

The development of case law in this area will be closely watched, and further guidance from the courts is anticipated.

If you would like to learn more about alienating behaviours and how they may impact your case, please contact our family law team. We are here to provide expert advice and support.

Jim Richards discusses divorce and pension sharing orders in FT Adviser and Today’s Wills & Probate

Posted on: March 25th, 2025 by Natasha Cox

Director and Head of Family Jim Richards discusses how despite their usefulness, the use of pension sharing orders in divorce proceedings has not become widespread since their introduction 25 years ago. 

Jim’s article was published in FT Adviser, 20 March 2025, and can be found here. A version of his article was also published in Today’s Wills & Probate, 21 March 2025, and can be found here.

It is a sadly familiar scenario at the end of a marriage – especially in TV dramas. Along with the sale of the house there is the dividing up of the debris from the failed relationship. Who gets the pictures? Who gets the potted plants? Who gets the cat?

Not so often featured is perhaps the most important decision of all: who gets the pension?

A study undertaken on pensions and divorce at the start of the decade by research hub MICRA, based at the University of Manchester, along with the Pensions Policy Institute, came to some clear conclusions.

The research found that there were “wide gendered pension disparities” within couples at the higher end of the income distribution, as well as those at the lower end too. Overall, it suggested that such disparities could make a “marked difference” to couples going through separation proceedings. 

However, unlike a prenuptial agreement, for example, pension sharing on divorce should not exclusively be a concern for the wealthy.

Its potential importance and contribution to wellbeing applies widely across society as a whole.

Yet, in the midst of the mayhem that often accompanies the dissolution of a marriage, it can easily get overlooked.

Pensions often not priority

By and large couples heading for divorce are in their 30s and 40s.

Retirement may seem a long way off and the immediate priority might be ‘what happens now?’ rather than the remote issue of finances 30 years ahead. 

Of course, one aspect of this is that pensions still do not loom large enough in younger, middle-aged people’s awareness. Many do not save enough and they do not do so when they are young enough for it to make a difference. 

As revealed by the MICRA and PPI research, most people are also significantly under-resourced in terms of their retirement income and pay little attention to this until they are in their 50s. 

By this point, it is obviously much harder to compensate by increasing contributions for the years that have already passed.

Meanwhile, on divorce, this deficit problem can be compounded if parties are aiming to take on new mortgages to meet their housing needs with the possibility that they might not be repaid until well into retirement.

Any income that they enjoy must be deployed first to repaying the mortgage. 

They will not have time enough from perhaps their early 50s until retirement in which to put more money into a pension fund.

Short-term thinking about pensions can overlook the importance of long-term financial security – and it also reflects the importance of receiving tailored legal advice.

If you would like advice on divorce and financial settlements, please contact a member of our Family team.

Helping children understand divorce and blended families: Our top book picks

Posted on: March 3rd, 2025 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

World Book Day, on the 6th of March, presents an excellent opportunity to explore literature that can assist families in navigating the complexities of separation and blended family dynamics. The emotional turmoil that often accompanies separation can make it difficult for parents to communicate effectively with their children. While each family’s circumstances are unique, the following books can serve as valuable resources to facilitate discussions with younger children about these significant changes.

Metaphors can be an effective tool in helping children comprehend and process difficult topics. The selected titles below not only address the issue of separation but also explore the dynamics of blended families, offering a gentle and relatable approach to these sensitive subjects.

Our Top Seven Recommendations

  1. https://www.andersenpress.co.uk/books/the-box-full-of-wonders/

  1. https://www.andersenpress.co.uk/books/the-hairdo-that-got-away-2/

  1. https://www.walker.co.uk/9781406341768/living-with-mum-and-living-with-dad-my-two-homes/

  1. https://www.walker.co.uk/9780744589252/two-homes/

  1. https://www.penguin.co.uk/search-results?q=two+places+to+call+home&tab=books

 

  1. https://www.andersenpress.co.uk/books/marry-me-mole/

  1. https://www.andersenpress.co.uk/books/luna-loves-library-day/

Transparency within family law proceedings has been a recent subject of debate, and East London Family Court recently provided clarity on this topic

Posted on: August 19th, 2024 by Hugh Dineen-Lees

In June 2024, HHJ Reardon sitting in the East London Family Court handed down her judgement in the case of G v S (Family Law Act 1996: Publicity) [2024] EWFC 231 (B), an interesting case concerning confidentiality in private family court proceedings.

Eleanor Wood of Lawrence Stephens acted on behalf of the respondent, instructing Maria Gallagher of Pump Court Chambers.

Prior to the final hearing, the applicant and respondent entered into Family Law Act proceedings in which no findings were made by the Court. The applicant’s position in this case was that he should be able to speak publicly, and in his own name about these proceedings and the evidence filed by each party. The applicant argued that family court proceedings, whilst heard in private, are not subject to any restriction in respect of publication and he is therefore free to speak publicly. It was also contended that should this be wrong, the restriction should be relaxed in this case because he wished to be involved in a documentary about domestic abuse and honour-based violence, which would increase public awareness and understating of this issue.

The respondent argued that there is an implied undertaking of confidentiality within family proceedings and further that her Article 8 rights to privacy outweighed the applicant’s Article 10 rights to freedom of speech and the wider public interest in publication.

In reaching a decision, HHJ Reardon concluded at paragraph 44 of her judgement “that the starting point is one of confidentiality”, and that the applicant would need to “seek the permission of the court to publish information about the proceedings.” Ultimately, she held that no findings had been made in Family Law Act proceedings, and that the respondent’s Article 8 rights did outweigh the applicant’s Article 10 rights, noting that it would be very difficult to ensure real anonymity. The applicant’s application was dismissed.

Eleanor Wood, Co-Head of Family at Lawrence Stephens and solicitor for the husband, commented:

“We are pleased to have secured a successful outcome for our client in a complex case which presented several issues which needed to be considered and dealt with at various stages. This highlights the importance of a well-prepared case to identify how the assets were used and where they originated when determining how they should be divided upon separation. The outcome is a fair one. It reflects the needs of the wife in conjunction with how the assets were used or matrimonialised, and that it is not always a simple sharing principle being applied.”

The full judgment can be read here.

Lawrence Stephens announces five Director promotions

Posted on: August 1st, 2024 by Natasha Cox

Lawrence Stephens is delighted to announce the promotion to Director of five exceptional colleagues who have consistently demonstrated a drive for excellence and dedication in delivering the best outcomes for their clients at all times.

Rachel Coulthard from our Real Estate Finance and Banking team, acts for borrowers and lenders across bridging finance, development finance, secured lending and high-value refinances of property and property portfolios.

From our Corporate and Commercial team, Katherine Zangana has over a decade of experience acting for small and medium-sized businesses, specialising in acquisitions, restructuring and other corporate transactions, as well as commercial contract matters.

Having previously worked in the firm’s Dispute Litigation team, Abtin Yeganeh becomes Director in our new Property Litigation department, advising clients in relation to all aspects of real estate disputes – including secured recoveries, trespass, professional negligence, and landlord tenant matters

Having led the firm’s Family department since November 2023, Jim Richards and Eleanor Wood are both highly experienced solicitors with significant experience acting for a wide range of clients including high-net-worth and high-profile individuals, foreign nationals, non-domiciles, UK nationals living abroad, and multinational families.

Steven Bernstein, Managing Director at Lawrence Stephens, commented: 

“With these five Director promotions, and the launch of a new department for the firm, we are proud to be continuing to demonstrate Lawrence Stephens’ growth and cross-departmental expertise. Rachel, Katherine, Abtin, Ellie and Jim’s cross-sector practices reflect the full-service approach we take at Lawrence Stephens, and how we are able to deliver the best outcomes for our clients.”

Central Family Court hands down landmark ruling in matrimonial property case

Posted on: July 25th, 2024 by Yvonne Uzoka

In June 2024, HHJ Edward Hess sitting in the Central Family Court handed down his judgment in the case of RM V WP [2024] EWFC 191 (B) ­­– a complex financial remedies case concerning the division of matrimonial property, and to what extent real property had been ‘matrimonialised’.

Jim Richards and Eleanor Wood of Lawrence Stephens acted on behalf of the husband, instructing Jenna Lucas of Pump Court Chambers.

The case centred around four properties owned by the respondent husband, with the wife arguing that she should receive 50% of the equity of all four properties. She argued this on the basis that these properties – owned by the husband prior to the marriage and held in his sole name – had become ‘matrimonialised’ by virtue of serving as family homes throughout their marriage. HHJ Hess found that one of these properties had never served as a family home, and as such had not been ‘matrimonialised’. The wife contended that she should receive 50% of the equity of the three remaining properties if HHJ Hess view was that this asset was not matrimonalised.

In considering what the wife’s award should be, HHJ Hess concluded in paragraph 37 of his judgment that “there is justification here for departing in the husband’s direction from an equal division of the net equity in the three homes which have been family homes. My view is that the fair answer here is for the wife to be awarded the amount that meets her needs.”

HHJ Hess ultimately assessed the wife’s needs to be less than 50% of the equity in the three ‘matrimonialised’ properties and granted her award on this basis accordingly.

Eleanor Wood, Co-Head of Family at Lawrence Stephens and solicitor for the husband, commented: “We are pleased to have secured a successful outcome for our client in a complex case which presented several issues which needed to be considered and dealt with at various stages.

“This highlights the importance of a well-prepared case to identify how the assets were used and where they originated when determining how they should be divided upon separation. The outcome is a fair one. It reflects the needs of the wife in conjunction with how the assets were used or matrimonialised, and that it is not always a simple sharing principle being applied.”

The full judgment can be read here.

How athletes and celebrities can ensure they stay on the fairway during divorce proceedings

Posted on: July 18th, 2024 by Natasha Cox

Following Rory McIlroy’s recent divorce filing, and his subsequent dismissal of these proceedings, Head of Family Jim Richards and Associate in the Sports & Entertainment team William Bowyer explore how celebrities and athletes can ensure they stay on the fairway during divorce proceedings. 

Jim and William’s article was published in eprivateclient, 13 June 2024, and can be found here.

Golf superstar Rory McIlroy’s recently announced divorce raises a number of important questions for athletes and celebrities managing divorce proceedings – particularly when filing for divorce overseas. 

While Mr McIlroy and his wife Erica Stoll have since ended divorce proceedings, this widely reported case still bears relevance for those looking to manage high-profile separation proceedings.

High-net-worth individuals such as athletes and other celebrities often have a choice of jurisdictions in which to file for divorce. The forum for proceedings can be pivotal to a case, and thus will often be a key factor in deciding where proceedings are filed. 

In Mr McIlroy’s case, the Northern Ireland-born sportsman had papers served on Erica Stoll, his wife of seven years and a New York state native, at their home in Jupiter, Florida. Court documents were subsequently revealed to have been filed in Palm Beach County, Florida, confirming the jurisdiction selected by Mr McIlroy for the couple’s divorce proceedings.

Deciding on the most appropriate jurisdiction to deal with a divorce case can, however, lead to a number of challenges in dealing with assets across a number of jurisdictions as well as the tax considerations to which high-net-worth individuals must pay heed if they are to stay on the fairway during divorce proceedings.

Failure to consider the various cross-jurisdictional complexities of divorce can give rise to costly and unwanted satellite litigation, and suggests that it is therefore important for athletes and celebrities to seek advice from legal, tax and pension professionals from all relevant jurisdictions to ensure as swift and efficient a resolution as possible. 

However, the procurement of such counsel comes at a not inconsiderable cost, especially in situations where there is a wide range of disputes between the divorcing spouses, leaving both parties exposed to a significant cost burden at the outset of the case and throughout the ensuing proceedings.

Beyond the legal case itself, image and reputation management is also of the utmost importance, particularly for athletes and celebrities, as a messy and public separation could result in lucrative endorsements being lost. In Mr McIlroy’s case, as with so many others living in the glare of the media spotlight, already every available detail of the divorce proceedings is being pored over by the press and public alike in typically scurrilous fashion. 

Mr Mcllroy’s brand partners will need to consider their contractual arrangements with the golfer and assess whether a) this matter impacts their partnership and b) whether they have any grounds under their contract to end the relationship or at the very least, use it to their commercial advantage.

Celebrities who are forced to live their lives in the public eye have to be extra vigilant as to how each and every move they make will be interpreted, no matter how private the matter at stake. The well-documented travails of Mr McIlroy’s fellow golfer Tiger Woods during the collapse of his marriage to Erin Woods in 2009 will have given Mr McIlroy and his advisers ample food for thought when considering how best to handle the optics of his own marital breakdown.

High-net-worth individuals, celebrities and athletes must seek a wide range of advice before filing for divorce – including everything from tax and pensions advice to image rights and IP – to ensure that separation proceedings are handled swiftly and any potential fallout is minimised. Of paramount importance is choosing representatives to sensitively handle child arrangements to minimise the impact of the separation on the couple’s offspring. 

Frequently, children become unwitting victims of warring spouses’ anger towards one another during divorce proceedings, and all too often the glare of publicity spurs parties into even rasher and more regrettable actions than they may otherwise have taken had they not felt compelled to ‘prove’ themselves and their resilience to the world at large.

Similarly, it is imperative for both parties in divorce proceedings to select advisers as carefully as possible. It is, after all, their guidance which will be of critical importance to the outcome of the case, and to the ultimate financial settlement between the divorcing couple. 

Divorce and separation is never easy, nor pleasant, for either side, but when played out in the public eye there is even more potential for mistakes and missteps. Time spent calmly and diligently assessing options at the outset of a case may at times seem onerous and expensive, but if deployed properly will pay dividends in the end.

The Transparency Reporting Pilot

Posted on: February 29th, 2024 by Maverick Freedlander

Every year, thousands of families are deeply affected by the decisions made by the Family Court. Historically, very little was known to the public about how the Court operated, often leading to the family justice system being criticised for being too secretive.

To address these concerns, the Transparency Reporting Pilot (‘the Pilot’) was introduced in the Family Courts of Leeds, Carlisle and Cardiff in January 2023. Following a successful year, the Pilot was extended to a total of 16 Family Courts in England and Wales on 29 January 2024. 

The Pilot authorises accredited journalists and ‘legal bloggers’ to report on what they see and hear during Family Court proceedings. Reporters will also have access to confidential court documents and be able to engage in discussions with parties to the proceedings.

Before publicising their observations, reporters will need to obtain a Transparency Order from the court, which sets out exactly what they may or may not publicise in each individual case. Additionally, reporters must anonymise the parties to ensure that their identity is not disclosed.

The implementation of the Pilot is significant as it represents a departure from legislation that previously prevented the publication of this material. For the first time, hundreds of Family Court cases are now reported on in mainstream media including BBC News, The Daily Mail and The Guardian.

With this new transparency, the Pilot is credited with improving public understanding and confidence in the family justice system, as first-hand reports of family cases (including specifics of the court’s procedures and decision-making processes) are now available to the public.

This is crucial because, statistically, a significant proportion of the population will become embroiled in legal proceedings following the breakdown of a relationship. The Pilot enables the public and parties to approach proceedings with greater confidence, understanding and clarity.   

The Pilot has also improved public confidence in the family justice system. Reporters are now able to name the professionals involved in the court proceedings, including the Judges, legal representatives and local authority workers. Where this information is publicly available, the public will be able to scrutinise the decisions and actions of these professionals. This scrutiny, in turn, may lead to professionals “upping their game”, ultimately improving the system and ensuring a better outcome for the parties.

Following the extension of the Transparency Reporting Pilot, the judiciary has continued to review its impact. So far, the reviews have suggested that the Pilot has significantly increased public trust and confidence in the family courts whilst protecting the parties’ confidentiality. If the Pilot’s positive effects persist, it is possible that it will eventually become a permanent fixture and be extended to all Family Courts in England and Wales.

At Lawrence Stephens, our Family team offers bespoke advice and a wide range of services including divorces, both domestic and international, financial settlements and claims involving overseas assets, for a diverse range of clients including professionals and HNW individuals.

Lawrence Stephens promotes two to joint Heads of Family

Posted on: November 22nd, 2023 by AlexT

Lawrence Stephens is pleased to announce the appointment of Senior Associates Eleanor Wood and Jim Richards to joint Heads of their Family practice.

With the appointment of Eleanor and Jim to joint Heads of practice, Lawrence Stephens reaffirms its commitment to continuing its high level of integrated legal advice to a diverse range of clients including high-net-worth and high-profile individuals, foreign nationals, non-domiciles, UK nationals living abroad, and multinational families.

Commenting on the new appointments, Steven Bernstein, Managing Director and Co-Founder of Lawrence Stephens, said: “We are delighted to announce Eleanor and Jim’s appointment as Heads of our Family department. This appointment marks our continued dedication to providing the very best service for our clients, and to growing our fantastic team.”

Ranked as a ‘Key Lawyer’ in The Legal 500 and an Associate To Watch’ in Chambers & Partners respectively, Eleanor works closely with clients on complex family issues, with a particular interest in Children Act matters, including cross-border relocation, change of residence applications and internal relocations, as well as divorce and matrimonial finance work, including the division of businesses and high-value properties.

Jim, who has over 15 years of extensive experience, specialises in a range of areas of family litigation involving a number of different assets and jurisdictions, particularly financial settlements and children cases. He was also previously a member of the Law Society Children’s Panel, working on complex cases where the children were parties to the litigation.

Working closely with the firm’s other departments on connecting matters such as sale of property, wills and probate issues, inheritance planning, dispute resolution and business restructuring, the Family practice will continue to offer a coherent and broad level of service to the Firm’s existing clients whilst drawing on the strength in depth of expertise across the team.

Eleanor Wood, Head of Family, commented: “I am thrilled to be heading up Lawrence Stephens’ Family practice. Working closely with the other fantastic departments at the firm, Jim and I look forward to continuing to provide first-class service to our loyal clients.”

Jim Richard, Head of Family, commented: “It is a pleasure to be joining Eleanor as Head of Family at Lawrence Stephens. Servicing the changing needs of our clients across a wide range of service, we pride ourselves on our collaborative approach and expertise.”

Mandatory mediation in separation proceedings will lessen impact on children, families, and the court system

Posted on: April 25th, 2023 by AlexT

With the government announcing proposals to make mediation a mandatory part of separation proceedings, our Family team examines how this will likely affect families and children during this process.

The Ministry of Justice recently announced proposals to make mediation a mandatory part of the separation process in England and Wales. The proposals are set to undergo government consultation for 12 weeks, ending on 15 June 2023.

The main aim of these proposals is to reduce the number of separating families having to resolve issues in the courtroom, a process that can often have a damaging impact on the children involved. These proposals are expected to provide better protection for children, decrease the financial burden that comes with heavy litigation costs, and reduce the pressure on the court system which is currently experiencing heavy backlogs.

Former Secretary of State for Justice Dominic Raab MP described the aims of the proposals saying: “When parents drag out their separation through lengthy and combative courtroom battles it impacts on their children’s schoolwork, mental health and quality of life.”

The press release issued by the government explains that the move is expected to assist up to 19,000 families going through separation proceedings to resolve their issues outside of the courtroom.

The proposals, however, will not apply to all separation proceedings.

Most notably, those matters involving history or allegations of domestic violence, child protection issues or are a matter of urgency will be excluded and will continue to be assessed in court.

Raab explained that “plans will divert thousands of time-consuming family disputes away from the courts – to protect children and ensure the most urgent cases involving domestic abuse survivors are heard by a court as quickly as possible.”

The government currently runs the Family Mediation Voucher Scheme which provides separating couples with up to £500 worth of vouchers towards resolving their disputes through mediation. It has announced that this will receive an additional £15m in funding and will be extended until April 2025.
Chief Executive of the Children and Family Court Advisory Support Service (Cafcass), Jacky Tiotto highlighted Cafcass’ support of the government’s aims saying: “Programmes that encourage parents to consider together what is safe and in the best interests of their children help to keep the focus on what children want and need as they grow up.”

If you are going through proceedings, or would like some advice on a matter, please contact Bethan on bhill-howells@lawstep.co.uk