Samantha Farndale & Tara Lyons analyse two Schedule 1 cases, both showing the court’s focus on needs in relation to financial provision for children
- This article explains the purpose of the Children Act 1989, Sch 1, which is often used when the parties have not been married.
- It sets out the approach of the court in PS v CS [2023] EWFC 323 (B), a modest asset Sch 1 case, and the high-profile case of footballer Kyle Walker and his mistress Lauryn Goodman, both of which highlight the court’s focus on the genuine needs of the children.
The purpose of Sch 1 to the Children Act 1989 is to allow the court to make financial provision for the children of separating parents, or parents who are not married. Claims are usually, although not always, made when the resident parent seeks financial support from the (wealthier) non-resident parent. This can be in relation to education and child maintenance, and can include periodic payments or a lump sum.
It
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b21f1aaf_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=754d0e82_1)
