Child Maintenance Service meaning

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: Children's social care Public procurement Social housing Governance Social care Local government finance Education Healthcare Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Latest Q&A Children's social care Supreme Court dismisses appeal upholding care order procedures (The Father v Worcestershire CC) In The Father v Worcestershire County Council [2025] UKSC 1, the Supreme Court rejected the father’s challenge to the care order that placed his children with foster carers. He had applied for a writ of habeas corpus, asserting the order was made without jurisdiction and that the children were unlawfully deprived of their liberty. The Court of Appeal had already refused his bid, indicating that any objection to a care order must be pursued using the mechanisms in the Children Act 1989 and the Family Procedure Rules, not via habeas corpus. The Supreme Court endorsed that approach, noting the children were not detained but living...

In this issue: Practice and procedure Relationship breakdown Public children Private children Financial provision International children Daily and weekly news alerts Updated content Useful information Practice and procedure Family Justice Council Bridget Lindley memorial lecture HHJ Khatun Sapnara will deliver the Bridget Lindley memorial lecture on 12 March 2025. This online lecture forms part of the Family Justice Council’s annual interdisciplinary conference, taking place in Birmingham. The theme this year is ‘Diversity and Inclusion in the Family Justice System: Promoting Best Practice in Decision Making’... Relationship breakdown HMCTS adds ability for a solicitor to remove themselves as representing a party in divorce applications HM Courts and Tribunals Service has enabled MyHMCTS to let a solicitor end their representation in divorce matters. Choose ‘stop representing client’ from the next step drop-down to use the feature, which launched on 10 February 2025. Proceed with care: once submitted, access ends immediately and the case...

Practice Note This Practice Note sets out guidance on the court’s authority to order periodical payments and/or lump sums covering school fees and other educational or training outgoings. It outlines the steps to be taken in matters involving parents who are or have been married or in a civil partnership, as well as in situations where the parents have never been married or in a civil partnership, and prescribes the process to follow. Significant limits apply to the court’s ability to make periodical payment orders for a child where the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) has, or would have, competence to carry out a maintenance calculation. Even so, the court still has power to direct that a parent, or any person who has treated the relevant child as a child of the family, must pay or contribute towards the expense of a child receiving instruction at an educational institution, or undertaking training for a trade, profession, or vocation (whether or not in paid work). Most frequently, such directions concern the...

This Practice Note sets out the situations where you may seek a top-up maintenance order after the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) has issued a maximum maintenance calculation and the non-resident parent’s (NRP) gross income surpasses a stated threshold. It guides you through making an application under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973), the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004) and the Children Act 1989 (ChA 1989) for a top-up order. It also addresses possible orders relating to step-children. For background and practical direction on the statutory child support scheme, see: Child Maintenance Service—overview. Applicable law You may apply to the court for a ‘top-up’ order once the CMS has completed a maximum maintenance calculation and the NRP’s gross weekly income is more than £3,000. The court must be persuaded that, on the facts of the case, it is suitable for the NRP to make further periodical payments under a maintenance order in addition to the maximum calculation. See also Practice Note: Statutory child support scheme. It is...

This review outlines the principal updates to the Immigration Rules (the Rules) contained in HC 877 that will most concern business immigration advisers. HC 877 was laid on 11 March 2016, accompanied by an Explanatory Memorandum (EM). This notice excludes amendments to Tier 2 of the Points-Based System (PBS) recommended by the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) in its January 2016 report, as the Home Office has not yet issued a formal response to the MAC review. Revisions to the Immigration Rules for Tier 2 are expected in the summer or autumn. Be aware that two sets of corrections were placed on the opening pages of HC 877 in March 2016, before the Statement took effect. You can jump to individual subjects swiftly via the Contents bar. Implementation Unless specified otherwise, the amendments apply to applications submitted on or after 6 April 2016. Applications filed before this date will be determined under the Rules in force as at 5 April 2016. Definitions Apart from definition changes that...

This note offers broad guidance on financial support for children. Your family solicitor can give tailored advice to suit your particular circumstances and needs. Child maintenance Under the law relating to child maintenance (also called child support), the court is generally unable to make a child maintenance order other than by the parties’ consent (agreement), except where certain exceptions apply. Any consent order for a child’s maintenance binds for only one year, after which either parent may seek a calculation from the Child Maintenance Service (CMS), if they wish to do so. Where you and the other parent cannot settle the level of maintenance, either party can apply to the CMS for a formal assessment...

The statutory formula for child maintenance under the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) The statutory formula for child maintenance under the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991) does not link the amount payable to whether the paying parent has contact with the children, other than insofar as the shared care rules operate. Under CSA 1991, s 3(5), it is recognised that, for the purposes of the Act, there can be more than one person with care in relation to the same qualifying child. The Child Support Maintenance Calculation Regulations 2012, SI 2012/2677, reg 46(2), further provide that any calculation must be grounded in the number of nights the non-resident parent is expected to care for the qualifying child overnight during the 12 months commencing on the effective date of the relevant calculation decision. The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) retains a discretion to take into account a shorter timeframe where appropriate in making that assessment...

The Family Court holds jurisdiction, under section 23 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973), to make orders for periodical payments in favour of a party to a marriage, or in favour of a child of the family, for that party’s own maintenance or for the maintenance of a child. This power is, nevertheless, subject to the provisions of the Child Support Act 1991 (CSA 1991), and CSA 1991, s 8 correspondingly and accordingly limits the court’s powers to make child maintenance orders...

Much will turn on the exact provisions settled between the parties; for example, whether the essential component of child maintenance was set as a fixed sum with no top‑up payable at the time of the initial order because, at that stage, the payer’s earnings did not cross the relevant threshold. It will also matter whether, when that basic maintenance figure was determined, a 50/50 shared care regime was already in place and operating from the outset. The calculation used in the order appears to mirror the approach endorsed by Mostyn J in CB v KB, particularly at paragraph [49], where he indicated that in any case in which the non‑resident parent’s gross annual income does not exceed £650,000, the starting benchmark should be the output of the formula, disregarding the cap on gross annual income set at £156,000...