Child maintenance (Pensions) meaning

Simkova v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2025] UKSC 41 What are the practical implications of this case? First, it is settled that EU nationals living in the UK, whose children reside in an EU member state, cannot receive the Universal Credit child element for those children. This holds even where the parent pays towards the children’s maintenance and support, notwithstanding the realities of cross‑border family life. Second, the judgment shows the courts continue to grapple with dense EU law even after Brexit, specifically in areas where the UK‑EU Withdrawal Agreement preserves direct effect. It underscores the ongoing need to interpret and apply those preserved rules when they bear on disputes arising in the domestic benefits system, for cases such as this. Third, this appeal did not give the Supreme Court an opportunity to define the scope of its discretion to seek a CJEU ruling on a question under Part Two of the Agreement concerning citizens’ rights. That discretion applies only to proceedings...

In this issue: Practice and procedure Financial provision Private children Public children International children LexTalk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content New Q&As New legislation Useful information Practice and procedure UKSC Deputy President gives speech on the law and AI On 30 November 2023, Lord Hodge, Deputy President of the Supreme Court, delivered an address at De Montfort University, Leicester, on the relationship between the law and artificial intelligence (AI). He underlined the imperative to reshape legal rules to recognise and regulate emerging technologies, and pointed to the opportunities these innovations offer to strengthen both the legal and justice systems. See: LNB News 03/01/2024 44. Survivors of domestic abuse and their lived experiences with temporary ‘safe’ accommodation in England The Office for National Statistics has released qualitative research examining survivors’ experiences of accessing, living in, and moving on from temporary ‘safe’ accommodation in England. MoJ...

In this issue: Practice and procedure Private children International children Financial provision LexTalk®Family: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New content Updated content New Q&As Useful information Practice and procedure Family court judges’ anonymisation reversed by Court of Appeal (Tickle & Summers v BBC and others) UK media coverage remains centred on the killing of ten-year-old Sara Sharif by her father and step-mother. In its aftermath, reporters Louise Tickle and Hannah Summers, together with leading news organisations, applied for disclosure of materials and information from earlier Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) proceedings relating to Sara and her brothers and sisters, seeking, among other things, the identities of the judges involved. Although none of those judges had asked to remain anonymous, Mr Justice Williams’ disclosure order nevertheless barred publication of their names. In Tickle & Summers v BBC and others [2025] EWCA Civ 42, the Court of Appeal allowed the challenges to...

Stop Press: On 31 March 2026, Sir Andrew McFarlane, President of the Family Division, unveiled consolidated guidance on allocation and gatekeeping for children proceedings in the Family Court, taking effect on 5 May 2026. This supersedes the 2014 public and private law guidance and establishes a single allocation framework for all children matters. It formalises the function of gatekeeping teams, aligns allocation with modern procedural pathways (including Child Focused Courts), and reaffirms key principles of judicial continuity, proportionality and the efficient deployment of judicial resources, see News Analysis: Consolidated allocation and gatekeeping guidance for children proceedings issued. This Practice Note is being updated to reflect the President’s guidance. This Practice Note also clarifies the distinction between financial orders and financial remedies under the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955. It outlines the financial orders the court may make within: proceedings for divorce, nullity and judicial separation the civil partnership equivalents including orders relating to financial provision, property and pensions....

This Practice Note outlines the jurisdiction and criteria for securing child maintenance under the statutory regime run by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, operating through the Child Maintenance Service (CMS), a division of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). It further explains the process for obtaining a maintenance calculation, the applicable eligibility criteria, and the relevant formulae used by the CMS. For consistency, the expression non-resident parent (NRP) refers to the paying (or potentially paying) parent, while person with care (PWC) refers to the individual (not always a parent) who receives (or may receive) child support maintenance under the statutory scheme. Introduction The Child Maintenance and Other Payments Act 2008 (CMOPA 2008) amended the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991), creating the third child support scheme, which was rolled out to all new applications on 25 November 2013. After the closure of the Child Support Agency in 2018, thereafter every application has been handled by the CMS and processed within that system...

This Practice Note sets out procedural guidance for managing applications to the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) for child maintenance under the statutory child support scheme, covering how such applications are handled, what information must be supplied, and the associated enforcement powers available. Child support—basics Since the Child Support Agency closed in 2018, every application for child support maintenance under the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) is now administered by the Secretary of State (for Work and Pensions) acting through the CMS. The relevant legislation uses the terminology person with care (PWC) and non-resident parent (NRP). In its public-facing material, the CMS refers to the NRP as the paying parent and the PWC as the receiving parent respectively...

Parties This Agreement is entered into on [ insert day and month ] 20[ insert year ] [ Insert name ] of [ insert full address ] ( PARTY A ) [ Insert name ] of [ insert full address ] ( PARTY B ) Whereas (A) Intended [ marriage OR civil partnership ] This Agreement is prepared in anticipation of, and is contingent upon, the intended [ marriage OR civil partnership ] of PARTY A and PARTY B on [ insert date ] 20[ insert year ], or on such later date as PARTY A and PARTY B may agree (‘the [ marriage OR civil partnership ] ’) (B) Children [ (i) ] PARTY A and PARTY B jointly have [ a child OR children ], [ name(s) and date(s) of birth ]. AND/OR [ (ii) ] PARTY A has [ a child OR children ] [ name(s) and date(s) of birth ] and PARTY B is...

In the Family Court sitting at [ court name ] Case No: [ case number ] [ The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 OR The Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 together with Schedule 7 to the Civil Partnership Act 2004 OR The Civil Partnership Act 2004 OR The Child Support Act 1991 OR The Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 ] Concerning the [ Marriage OR Civil Partnership OR Relationship ] of [ applicant name ] and [ respondent name ] Having heard [ name the advocate(s) who appeared ] Upon reviewing the documents filed by the parties [ [IN THE CASE OF AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE] Having read the statements and taken the evidence of the witnesses identified in para [ para number ] of the Recitals below ] Order issued by [ name of judge ] on [ date ], sitting in [ open court OR private ] [ FOLLOWING A [ RESERVED OR WRITTEN OR EX TEMPORE ]...