Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“LexisNexis is great as I can find the answers I am looking for really quickly. I believe that nothing should be more than 6 clicks away - and the products from LexisNexis deliver on this standard”

Avensure

Access all documents on Secured periodical payments

Secured periodical payments meaning

Published by a LexisNexis Family expert
What does Secured periodical payments mean?
Regular court-ordered payments made at set intervals, with an additional requirement that the payer provides security—such as a capital deposit, a charge over property, a trust arrangement, a life policy, or a third‑party guarantee—to ensure the payments are met if the payer defaults. In England and Wales, “secured periodical payments order” is a statutory remedy used mainly in family financial remedies (divorce, dissolution, judicial separation) and child maintenance under the family law statutes, alongside ordinary periodical payments orders and lump sums. The court specifies the form and extent of security, may appoint trustees, and can vary or discharge the order; enforcement can be taken directly against the secured asset. Northern Ireland has equivalent statutory powers in matrimonial and children proceedings. In Scotland and Ireland, courts can order ongoing maintenance and require security (for example, caution or a charge), but “secured periodical payments” is a descriptive term rather than a defined label. Key uses include protecting the recipient where there is a risk of non‑payment, overseas residence, unstable income, or insolvency concerns. In personal injury and clinical negligence, periodical payment orders must be “reasonably secure”; practitioners may loosely describe such arrangements as secured, although the statutory test differs.
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Secured periodical payments

NEWS
Schedule 1 Children Act 1989 in ‘big money’ cases: Y v Z [2024] EWFC 4—child-centred budgets, no tariff, proportionate claims, housing and maintenance provision (England and Wales)

Y v Z [2024] EWFC 4 What are the practical implications of this case? Before determining the application, the court was taken through a series of authorities. Peel J concluded that those decisions do not reveal a standard tariff or an upper limit; instead, each application falls to be decided on its own facts and within its specific context, with context being decisive... ChA 1989, Sch 1 empowers the court to order a settlement of property, commonly structured as a trust, licence or lease. Such arrangements preserve the payer’s ownership of the asset, whilst permitting the payee to live in the property with the children during their minority, or until the conclusion of tertiary education, as explained in Re A (A Child: Financial Provision) [2014] EWCA Civ 1577, [2015] 2 FLR 625 and UD v DN (Schedule 1, Children Act 1989; Capital Provision) [2021] EWCA Civ 1947, [2022] 2 FLR 308... In addition, the court may direct the payment of a lump sum or a series...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Secured periodical payments

PRACTICE NOTES
Clean Break Orders on Divorce and Civil Partnership Dissolution: Principles, Types, Drafting and Case Law (England and Wales)

Duty of the court to consider a clean break Although a financial clean break is not presumed on divorce, the court remains obliged to assess whether using its powers to end the parties’ mutual financial responsibilities is appropriate. When deploying those powers, the court must also examine how and when each party’s obligations to the other should cease, and aim for termination as soon after the final order or decree as it judges fair and reasonable, consistent with what it regards as just and reasonable. In doing so, it evaluates both the practical method and the timing of that cessation. Section 25A of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) – mirrored in the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004) – does not specify when a clean break order may be appropriate, offering no guidance on the circumstances. However, where the court opts for a periodical payments or secured periodical payments order, it must consider capping the term to what is sufficient to allow the recipient to adapt, without...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Death of a party in family financial remedies: effect on applications, enforcement and variation (payments, lump sums, property, pensions) before/after final divorce/dissolution order—England and Wales

Practice Note This Practice Note sets out guidance on implementing and enforcing financial orders arising from family proceedings when one party has died. It examines the impact of a death on applications, and on secured and unsecured periodical payments, lump sum orders, property adjustment orders and pensions orders. Where a party dies before divorce or dissolution proceedings have begun, the parties remain married or in a civil partnership, and the deceased’s estate passes in line with their will or, if none, the intestacy rules. A claim for a financial order is personal to the spouses or civil partners and does not survive death. If either party dies before an application under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973) or Civil Partnership Act 2004 (CPA 2004) for financial provision or property adjustment is made, the court has no jurisdiction to make a financial order. Likewise, if death occurs before the financial proceedings are determined, the court will be unable to make a financial order...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
Drafting periodical payments orders in England and Wales: key terms, indexation, standing orders, attachment of earnings, global/Segal orders, and secured provision

Practice Note This Practice Note outlines guidance for drafting the terms of a periodical payments order (also referred to as maintenance), and encompasses the financial remedy order produced under the standard orders project. It addresses payment frequency, acceptable methods of payment, the duration of payments, and the application of index linking. It also sets out the court’s authority to make secured periodical payments orders, indicating what may constitute appropriate security and how such directions can be put into effect. Particular caution is required when formulating the terms of any periodical payments order so that it accurately reflects either the parties’ agreement or the court’s judgment. The Precedent: Standard order 2.1—financial remedy order, which includes periodical payments orders, has been issued by the President of the Family Division; use of the precedent is not mandatory, though its adoption is strongly encouraged. For broader guidance on the standard orders project, see Practice Note: Standard orders—general principles. See also Practice Notes: General principles of consent orders and Drafting the terms of a...

Read More Right Arrow