Guest viewing is limited
- You have a limited number of page views remaining
- 2 guest views remaining
- Register now to remove this limitation
Employer letter for shared lives with order?
- Thread starter KF31
- Start date
She has been LIP throughout but indicated that she may have a solicitor for this hearing.
We asked his McKenzie friend about case law and she said that he wouldn’t need to present any cause the judge would be aware that there is case law to support his arguments. I’ve tried to find some myself to try and give him some examples in case he does need it but I’m struggling to find any, mainly cause I’m not sure what to search for or where to look
Basic method is pull out points where she has contradicted herself or where evidence disproves her position. Keep it focussed on documents before the court. There is no need to attack, let her credibility crumble around her.
That’s how we’ve tried to do it and we have tried to make the questions closed questions where possible so that she hopefully can’t start giving in depth answers
Ok - it must be in a post rather than resources. Need to get one in resources! There is a lot of case law listed in the Legal Resources above but not for shared care - mainly for PA and transfer of residency (or shared care overseas).
For Cross Examination you need a structure prepared in advance. So he needs to go through her statement carefully, in advance. Photocopy it so you can highlight bits and write on it and annotate it. Find something that isn't true. See if you have any evidence in the bundle that proves it isn't true. And or - find bits of her statement that contradict with some other piece of evidence,.
For example if her statement says "The children have always spent Christmas with me and know nothing else and they don't want to spend it anywhere else". And you have a copy email from here agreeing Christmas arrangements with him three years ago say. Then the questioning would go something like:
So you say the Children have only ever spent Christmas with you, is that correct?
At this point she either has to say yes, as it's in her statement, or she'll start to bluster knowing she might be caught out. If she blusters he says
"It's here in your statement isn't it? That the children have only ever spent Christmas with you?" Then she has to say yes.
He then says
"Yet in this email you sent on 12th December 2018, it shows that you agreed the Children would be picked up by me on Christmas Eve and returned at 5pm Christmas Day". She might waffle a bit and say she forgot blah blah. He ignores that and then says
"So what is written in your statement is not true. The Children spent Christmas Day with me in 2018 and this used to be the case on alternate years until 2019 when you changed the arrangements."
That is just an example - there will be other and different points. But you need to prepare - go through the evidence and her statement and find contradictions. The goal is to show to the Judge that something in her statement is not true. Once that is done - her statement is effectively thrown out - meaning he wins the case. Then there's the issue of what the order will say and if it will be shared care.
Take a draft order with you. With everything on it that you want in an order. Then if and when the Judge agrees to all the points (or most of them) you say - I have a draft order here Sir, which just needs a brief amendment at clause b) to comply with your ruling, which perhaps you could do in pen, and then the order can be left at court for sealing.
Having said all that - her lawyer (if she has one) will be doing the same thing - trying to catch your partner out and prove he has lied about something. Hence he must know his statement back to front and inside out and be sure everything in it is 100% correct. If there's a slight discrepancy - prepare an answer for that in advance.
The other thing they want to do, as well as prove you're lying (and vice versa) is get you angry and flustered and hope you lose your cool. Don't do that. If under pressure, pause, breathe for a moment and clear your head, then respond calmly. If you don't know what to say, just say, I'm not sure I would need to try and remember or something.
You need to get really prepared this week-end. Get him to practice his cross examination on you like role play and you can advise whether the manner etc is right.
Get some caselaw together for why shared care is best and appropriate.
Finally - some McKenzie friends are not very good and can harm your case. I hope yours is a good one, but don't follow everything you're told - think for yourself.
This is his chance to get a very good order or not.
For Cross Examination you need a structure prepared in advance. So he needs to go through her statement carefully, in advance. Photocopy it so you can highlight bits and write on it and annotate it. Find something that isn't true. See if you have any evidence in the bundle that proves it isn't true. And or - find bits of her statement that contradict with some other piece of evidence,.
For example if her statement says "The children have always spent Christmas with me and know nothing else and they don't want to spend it anywhere else". And you have a copy email from here agreeing Christmas arrangements with him three years ago say. Then the questioning would go something like:
So you say the Children have only ever spent Christmas with you, is that correct?
At this point she either has to say yes, as it's in her statement, or she'll start to bluster knowing she might be caught out. If she blusters he says
"It's here in your statement isn't it? That the children have only ever spent Christmas with you?" Then she has to say yes.
He then says
"Yet in this email you sent on 12th December 2018, it shows that you agreed the Children would be picked up by me on Christmas Eve and returned at 5pm Christmas Day". She might waffle a bit and say she forgot blah blah. He ignores that and then says
"So what is written in your statement is not true. The Children spent Christmas Day with me in 2018 and this used to be the case on alternate years until 2019 when you changed the arrangements."
That is just an example - there will be other and different points. But you need to prepare - go through the evidence and her statement and find contradictions. The goal is to show to the Judge that something in her statement is not true. Once that is done - her statement is effectively thrown out - meaning he wins the case. Then there's the issue of what the order will say and if it will be shared care.
Take a draft order with you. With everything on it that you want in an order. Then if and when the Judge agrees to all the points (or most of them) you say - I have a draft order here Sir, which just needs a brief amendment at clause b) to comply with your ruling, which perhaps you could do in pen, and then the order can be left at court for sealing.
Having said all that - her lawyer (if she has one) will be doing the same thing - trying to catch your partner out and prove he has lied about something. Hence he must know his statement back to front and inside out and be sure everything in it is 100% correct. If there's a slight discrepancy - prepare an answer for that in advance.
The other thing they want to do, as well as prove you're lying (and vice versa) is get you angry and flustered and hope you lose your cool. Don't do that. If under pressure, pause, breathe for a moment and clear your head, then respond calmly. If you don't know what to say, just say, I'm not sure I would need to try and remember or something.
You need to get really prepared this week-end. Get him to practice his cross examination on you like role play and you can advise whether the manner etc is right.
Get some caselaw together for why shared care is best and appropriate.
Finally - some McKenzie friends are not very good and can harm your case. I hope yours is a good one, but don't follow everything you're told - think for yourself.
This is his chance to get a very good order or not.
Has somebody gone through order of play on the day?
My understanding:
Usually applicant will speak first.
Respondent will cross examine first.
Applicant then to cross examine.
Respondent sums up first.
Applicant sums up second.
They can reverse summing up if respondent is LIP and applicant is represented.
They can refer to the person being cross examined as "giving evidence".
Summing up is important, chance to deal with anything left hanging and make the strongest points.
My understanding:
Usually applicant will speak first.
Respondent will cross examine first.
Applicant then to cross examine.
Respondent sums up first.
Applicant sums up second.
They can reverse summing up if respondent is LIP and applicant is represented.
They can refer to the person being cross examined as "giving evidence".
Summing up is important, chance to deal with anything left hanging and make the strongest points.
So mum had the chance to submit her own evidence and has submitted nothing. Judge only said dad would cross examine, I think it’s cause he’s made allegations of breaches and she hasn’t. We’ve gone through each breach and based questions on her response and listed the evidence he has to prove each breach which shows her repose to the breach is lies. Hopefully we’ve done a good enough job on that but will definitely look at case law and get him to practice the questions with me
Ok there's a list of shared care case law on here. But it's not particularly up to date. It's still relevant but something recent would help as well.
Under each case you click the drop down menu and can read the Judgement. Pick out ones that apply. Then you just say something like
Sir, Re K 2008 EWCA 526 makes clear that ""Such an order emphasises the fact that both parents are equal in the eyes of the law and that they have equal duties and responsibilities as parents. The order can have the additional advantage of conveying the court´s message that neither parent is in control and that the court expects parents to co-operate with each other for the benefit of their children."
And likewise T vs T 2010 EWCA 1366 states ""26. In Re AR (A Child: Relocation) [2010] EWHC 1346 (Fam), Mostyn J said that a joint or shared residence order "is nowadays the rule rather than the exception even where the quantum of care undertaken by each parent is decidedly unequal". That, in my view, is to go too far. Whether or not a joint or shared residence order is granted depends upon a determination of what is in the best interests of the child in the light of all the factors in the individual case. However, it has certainly been established that it is not a pre-requisite for a shared residence order that the periods of time spent with each adult should be equal and nor is it necessary that there should be co-operation and goodwill between them and shared residence orders have been made in cases where there is hostility. Re A is an example of this as the parents were there said to be "at loggerheads"."
That is absolute Rubbish saying the Judge will just know the case law. He probably will but the point of final hearing is it's adversarial and one side has to convince the Judge their argument is right and their position for an order is the right one. The Judge will be swayed by case law as well as the particular circumstances.
I think you need a skeleton argument as well.
www.thecustodyminefield.com
Under each case you click the drop down menu and can read the Judgement. Pick out ones that apply. Then you just say something like
Sir, Re K 2008 EWCA 526 makes clear that ""Such an order emphasises the fact that both parents are equal in the eyes of the law and that they have equal duties and responsibilities as parents. The order can have the additional advantage of conveying the court´s message that neither parent is in control and that the court expects parents to co-operate with each other for the benefit of their children."
And likewise T vs T 2010 EWCA 1366 states ""26. In Re AR (A Child: Relocation) [2010] EWHC 1346 (Fam), Mostyn J said that a joint or shared residence order "is nowadays the rule rather than the exception even where the quantum of care undertaken by each parent is decidedly unequal". That, in my view, is to go too far. Whether or not a joint or shared residence order is granted depends upon a determination of what is in the best interests of the child in the light of all the factors in the individual case. However, it has certainly been established that it is not a pre-requisite for a shared residence order that the periods of time spent with each adult should be equal and nor is it necessary that there should be co-operation and goodwill between them and shared residence orders have been made in cases where there is hostility. Re A is an example of this as the parents were there said to be "at loggerheads"."
That is absolute Rubbish saying the Judge will just know the case law. He probably will but the point of final hearing is it's adversarial and one side has to convince the Judge their argument is right and their position for an order is the right one. The Judge will be swayed by case law as well as the particular circumstances.
I think you need a skeleton argument as well.
Shared Living Arrangements Case Law
Family Law - Shared Residence Case Law
I take my hat off to you, he is lucky to have such great support.
It was only said that dad would cross examine, for the allegations of breaches he has put forward. Mum hasn't put any forward or submitted any evidence so would they still ask her to cross examine dad?
Is this an enforcement hearing?
Thank you, it's been a long stressful time but I'm determined that although he has not legal rep he is going be on the best foot he can for this hearing.
Ok so although it's a final hearing it's not a final hearing for a Child Arrangements order but for variation of an order?
Anyway most of the above doesn't apply then. He will only be cross examining about allegations. It will be a similar style of cross examination though - and still take a draft order. It wouldn't do any harm to have some case law prepared to quote. (Particularly that last one about shared care still being appropriate even if there is hostility).
Who has made the allegations?
Anyway most of the above doesn't apply then. He will only be cross examining about allegations. It will be a similar style of cross examination though - and still take a draft order. It wouldn't do any harm to have some case law prepared to quote. (Particularly that last one about shared care still being appropriate even if there is hostility).
Who has made the allegations?
Obstruction of his contact with one of the children. Basically PA although I know it can't be put across as PA. Mum withheld contact numerous times for no good reason.
Enforcement was originally applied for and the judge later gave permission for him to submit an application for residence.
Enforcement was originally applied for and the judge later gave permission for him to submit an application for residence.
Ok I'm with you. So he's applied for residence, Cafcass did a section 7 and said shared care - if he can prove xyz with employer? It makes sense a bit now. From what I've seen, if a Dad applies for residence, Cafcass gang up with the Mother. It's sickening really that they think it's fine for a Mother to screw up a kid like that.
If his application for residence is still in, the Judge can, technically, order anything he wants at an enforcement hearing. And although this is a fact find it could turn into a final hearing as well. So maybe you need to be looking at case law for change of residence. There's the odd bit on here under Legal Resources.
Chances are it's more likely to be shared care than change of residence but he could ask for a suspended residence order. What that means is, if she breaches again, residence is automatically transferred.
If his application for residence is still in, the Judge can, technically, order anything he wants at an enforcement hearing. And although this is a fact find it could turn into a final hearing as well. So maybe you need to be looking at case law for change of residence. There's the odd bit on here under Legal Resources.
Chances are it's more likely to be shared care than change of residence but he could ask for a suspended residence order. What that means is, if she breaches again, residence is automatically transferred.
No sorry he originally went for full residence but section 7 said for residence to stay with mum and him to get extra time in school holidays. Because of the argument Cafcass put forward for this he changed his request to shared care, the judge stated in the last hearing she would not be agreeing to him having full residency so that is definitely a no go. He put forward the argument for shared care and judge stated they’d go to fact find but said this will also be final hearing, so everything will be decided at this hearing.
We have already mentioned possibility of a suspended residence order before he asked for a share of residency and we’ve talked about possibly asking for liberty to restore.
We have already mentioned possibility of a suspended residence order before he asked for a share of residency and we’ve talked about possibly asking for liberty to restore.